Legal Opinion
Griffiths v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided October 29, 2002No. 99-87TPublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WILSON, Judge.
This tax refund case is before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment, pursuant to Rule 56 of the United States Court of Federal Claims (“RCFC”). The Court holds as a matter of law that plaintiff is not entitled to a business expense deduction and refund pursuant to the claim of right doctrine for a payment made in settlement of a state court action. Consequently, plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is DENIED, and defendant’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.
BACKGROUND
The relevant facts are not in dispute. Plaintiff is the former president and chief…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Deputy, Administratrix v. Du PontSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- United States v. JanisSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- North American Oil Consolidated v. BurnetSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Cinergy Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2003
- Pennzoil-Quaker State Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
- Sumter v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2004
- Pennzoil-quaker State Co. & Subsidiaries v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2004
- Nacchio v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2016
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.