Preston v. United States
United States Court of Claims
The Reporters'1 statement of the case: The facts of the case appear sufficiently in the opinion of the court. No question is raised by the accounting officers in their disallowance of this claim as to the legality of a charge for medical and hospital attendance; but it is suggested that such attendance was in this case unnecessary, the sickness having occurred at Washington where there are always a number of medical officers of the Army stationed.
Read the full summary
The Reporters'1 statement of the case: The facts of the case appear sufficiently in the opinion of the court. No question is raised by the accounting officers in their disallowance of this claim as to the legality of a charge for medical and hospital attendance; but it is suggested that such attendance was in this case unnecessary, the sickness having occurred at Washington where there are always a number of medical officers of the Army stationed. The answer is that the claimant did not go to the Garfield Memorial Hospital by his own will, but was taken there by direction of the army surgeon…
1Opinion of the CourtPeelle, J.
The claimant, a first lieutenant in the United States Army, seeks reimbursement for 1471.43 alleged to have been paid by him to the Garfield Memorial Hospital for nursing, medicines, and medical attendance by a resident physician.
In his petition the claimant, in substance, avers that on the 16th day of September, 1898, while on official duty at the Headquarters of the Army in the War Department at Washington, he was taken suddenly and seriously ill, and was, while suffering- from very high fever, removed to the Garfield Memorial Hospital. He there remained continuously from said 16th day of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- In re BillingsUnited States Court of Claims · 1888