Legal Opinion
DeCosta v. United States
United States Court of Claims
Decided July 30, 1991No. 721-88CPublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BRUGGINK, Judge.
This is an action brought under certain provisions of the Federal Employees Pay Act (“Title 5”). 5 U.S.C. §§ 5542, 5545, 5546 (1988). As firefighters, plaintiffs presently receive standby premium pay in lieu of other types of premium pays. 5 U.S.C. § 5545(c)(1); 5 C.F.R. § 550.141 (1990). They contend that the amount of pay they would otherwise receive for dif*583ferent types of premium pay is greater than the standby premium pay they presently receive, and that therefore, pursuant to 5 C.F.R. § 550.142, they should be getting those other premium pays, and not standby pay.
Tr…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Udall v. TallmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Unemployment Compensation Comm'n of Alaska v. AragonSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Pauley v. BethEnergy Mines, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Michael Zumerling v. Donald J. DevineCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- James E. Decosta, Vinson D. Thomas v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993