FORD-CLIFTON v. Department of Veterans Affairs (2011)
green
· 53 citation events
across 8 courts.
Showing the 28 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 2012 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
201220192026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
Pirkkala v. MSPB (2023)
See Final Order at *4 (citation omitted); Ford-Clif- ton, 661 F.3d at 659 (“affirm[ing] the Board’s determina- tion that good cause was not shown to excuse Petitioner’s filing delay” because “as the Board properly found, there [wa]s no accompanying explanation of how [Petitioner’s] condition prevented a timely filing”).
“affirm[ing] the Board’s determina- tion that good cause was not shown to excuse Petitioner’s filing delay” because “as the Board properly found, there [wa]s no accompanying explanation of how [Petitioner’s] condition prevented a timely filing”
green
Renville v. Department of Health & Human Services (2015)
See Ford-Clifton, 661 F.3d at 660 (“It is widely agreed that an earlier dismissal based on a settlement agreement constitutes a final judgment on the merits in a res judicata analysis.”).
“It is widely agreed that an earlier dismissal based on a settlement agreement constitutes a final judgment on the merits in a res judicata analysis.”
green
Edwards v. Merit Systems Protection Board (2015)
Petitioners seeking a waiver must file “[a] specific and detailed description of the circumstances causing the late filing, accompanied by supporting documentation or other evidence.” Ford-Clifton v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 661 F.3d 655, 659 (Fed.Cir.2011) (citation omitted).
green
Weiss v. Merit Systems Protection Board (2015)
Petitioners seeking a waiver must file “[a] specific and detailed description of the circumstances causing the late filing, accompanied by supporting documentation or other evidence.” Ford-Clifton v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 661 F.3d 655, 659 (Fed.Cir.2011) (citation omitted).
Agency v. City of Green Forest, 921 F.2d 1394, 1404 (8th Cir. 1990); see also Ford-Clifton v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 661 F.3d 655, 660 (Fed.
“It is widely agreed that an earlier dismissal based on a settlement agreement consti- tutes a final judgment on the merits in a res judicata analysis.”
green
Lilly v. MSPB (2023)
See Ford-Clifton v. Dep’t of Veterans Affs., 661 F.3d 655, 659 (Fed.
“The Board has held that when petitioners allege delay for medical reasons, they must affirmatively identify medical evidence that ad- dresses the entire period of delay and explain how the ill- ness prevented a timely filing.”
green
Neese v. MSPB (2023)
S. Appx. 4; see Ford-Clifton v. Dep’t of Veterans Affs., 661 F.3d 655, 659 (Fed.
“[W]hen petitioners allege delay for medical reasons, they must affirmatively identify medical evidence that ad- dresses the entire period of delay and explain how the ill- ness prevented a timely filing.”
green
Neese v. MSPB (2023)
S. Appx. 4; see Ford-Clifton v. Dep’t of Veterans Affs., 661 F.3d 655, 659 (Fed.
“[W]hen petitioners allege delay for medical reasons, they must affirmatively identify medical evidence that ad- dresses the entire period of delay and explain how the ill- ness prevented a timely filing.”
green
Scott v. MSPB (2023)
See Ford-Clifton v. Dep’t of Veterans Affs., 661 F.3d 655, 659 (Fed.
“[W]hen petitioners allege delay for medi- cal reasons, they must affirmatively identify medical evi- dence that addresses the entire period of delay and explain how the illness prevented a timely filing.”
green
Lachiewicz v. Merit System Protection Board (2014)
With respect to delays allegedly resulting from medical impairment, the Board has held that petitioners must “affirmatively identify medical evidence that addresses the entire period of delay and explain how the illness prevented a timely filing.” Ford-Clifton v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 661 F.3d 655, 659 (Fed.Cir.2011) (affirming Board where there was “no accompanying explanation of how th[e] condition [deep vein thrombosis] prevented a timely filing” (citing Jerusalem v.…
green
Conway v. Merit Systems Protection Board (2013)
The Board “is afforded considerable discretion in such analyses.” Ford-Clifton v. Dept. of Veterans Affairs, 661 F.3d 655, 659 (Fed.Cir.2011).
Id. at 10; Ford-Clifton v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 661 F.3d 655, 660 (Fed.Cir.2011).
green
Haggart v. United States (2017)
See Ford-Clifton v. Department of Veterans Affairs, 661 F.3d 655, 660 (Fed.
“It is widely agreed that an earlier dismissal based on a settlement agreement constitutes a final judgment on the merits in a res judicata analysis.”
green
ULTRA-MEK, INC. v. UNITED FURNITURE INDUSTRIES, INC. (2021)
See also Ford- Clifton v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 661 F.3d 655, 660 (Fed.
“It is widely agreed that an earlier dismissal based on a settlement agreement constitutes a final judgment on the merits in a res judicata analysis.”
green
First Mortgage Corporation v. United States (2019)
It is well-established that “consent judgments entered pursuant to settlement agreements have the same effect as judgments after a trial on the merits.” Ford-Clifton v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 661 F.3d 655, 660 (Fed.
citing Hallco Mfg. Co. v. Foster, 256 F.3d 1290, 1294-95 (Fed. Cir. 2001)
green
Labatte v. United States (2017)
The F ederal Circuit has a longstanding practice of enforcing finality clauses in settlement agreements See Ford~Cli'j?on v. Dep ’l of Vererans Ajj"oirs, 661 F.3d 655, 660 (Fed.
holding settlement agreements for res judicata principles, have the same effect as a final judgment on the merits
green
Allensworth v. United States (2015)
The Federal Circuit has given preclusive effect to settlements, stating it is “widely agreed that an earlier dismissal based on a settlement agreement constitutes a final judgment on the merits in a res judicata analysis.” Ford-Clifton v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 661 F.3d 655, 660 (Fed.
green
Palafox Street Associates, L.P. v. United States (2014)
Under the doctrine of res judicata, “a final judgment on the merits bars a second action involving the same parties and the same claim.” Ford-Clifton v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 661 F.3d 655, 660 (Fed.Cir.2011).
green
Lucas v. Opm (2025)
See Ford-Clifton v. Dep’t of Veterans Affs., 661 F.3d 655 , 660 n.2 (Fed.
ex- pressing some hesitancy as to whether “the law of the case doctrine is available to agencies at all”
green
First Mortgage Corporation v. United States (2020)
See Ford-Clifton v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 661 F.3d 655, 660 (Fed.
green
Gelver Martinez v. Bank of America NA (2016)
See Ford-CIifton v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 661 F.3d 655, 660 (Fed.
“It is widely agreed that an earlier dismissal based on a settlement agreement constitutes a final judgment on the merits in a res judicata analysis,” and collecting cases
green
Trufant v. Department of the Air Force (2014)
“A final judgment on the merits of an action precludes the parties or their privies from relitigating issues that were or could have been raised in that action.” Federated Dep’t Stores, Inc. v. Moitie, 452 U.S. 394, 398 , 101 S.Ct. 2424 , 69 L.Ed.2d 103 (1981); see also Ford-Clifton v. Dep’t *984 of Veterans Affairs, 661 F.3d 655, 660 (Fed.Cir.2011); Carson v. Dep’t of Energy, 398 F.3d 1369, 1375 (Fed.Cir.2005).
green
London v. Merit Systems Protection Board (2012)
See, e.g., Ford-Clifton v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 661 F.3d 655, 659 (Fed.Cir.2011) (holding that “the Board properly held that neither alleged financial hardship nor inability to engage counsel establish good cause for [a] delay” of more than 11 months); Zamot v. Merit Sys.
green
Terry Hall v. Bpm Lumber, LLC (2024)
See Ford-Clifton v. Dep’t of Veterans Affs., 661 F.3d 655 , 660 n.2 (Fed.
green
Aki Singam v. Department of Defense (2023)
Singam I, RAF, Tab 36 at 2; see Ford-Clifton v. Department of Veterans Affairs, 661 F.3d 655, 661 (Fed.
citing Mannion v. Department of the Treasury, 429 F. App’x 986 (Fed. Cir. 2011
green
B.E. v. Pistotnik (2022)
"A voluntary dismissal of a case with prejudice, based on a settlement agreement that is approved by the court and journalized, is a final judgment on the merits." Honeycutt v. City of Wichita, 251 Kan. 451, 458 , 836 P.2d 1128 (1992); see also Ford-Clifton v. Department of Veterans Affairs, 661 F.3d 655, 660 (Fed.
citing cases from several jurisdictions and noting that "[i]t is widely agreed that an earlier dismissal based on a settlement agreement constitutes a final judgment on the merits"
green
Wolf v. Tzanides (In re Tzanides) (2017)
See id. at 254 (citing Ford-Clifton v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 661 F.3d 655, 660 (Fed.
“It is widely agreed that an earlier dismissal based on a settlement agreement constitutes a final judgment on the merits in a res judi-cata analysis,” and collecting cases
green
Kroll v. United States (2012)
See Ford-Clifton v. Dep’t of Veterans Affairs, 661 F.3d 655, 660 (Fed.Cir.2011) (“[A] final judgment on the merits bars a second action involving the same parties and the same claim.”).