United States v. Plaut

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• expressing reservation as to whether a claim based on promissory estoppel is within this court’s jurisdiction under the Tucker Act
• “Silence may not be construed as an acceptance of an offer in the absence of special circumstances existing prior to the submission of the offer.”
• “Silence may not be construed as an acceptance of an offer in the absence of special circumstances existing prior to the submission of the offer----”
• imposed security classification did not sufficiently interfere with plaintiff’s property rights to constitute a Fifth Amendment taking
• “Radioptics has failed to establish ... that a contractual relationship existed ... between Radioptics and defendant^]”
• “where the purpose of a regulation which causes interference with property rights is to prevent injury to the public welfare as opposed to merely bestowing upon the public a non-essential benefit, compensation under the fifth amendment is not required.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).