Legal Opinion

James W. Clinton v. The United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided April 17, 1970No. 424-69PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Per curiam

The plaintiff is an Air Force Major on active duty. He filed his petition in this court pro se, and defendant moved to dismiss on the ground that the petition sought relief which this court did not have jurisdiction to grant, among other things a declaratory judgment. United States v. King, 395 U.S. 1, 89 S.Ct. 1501, 23 L.Ed.2d 52 (1969). The motion asserts the further ground that there is no clear and concise statement of a monetary claim as required by Rule 35(a). Before the court could act on this motion the plaintiff moved for leave to amend. The proposed amendment clarifies the nature of…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. KingSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. Louis G. Ruderer v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1969
  3. Boruski v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1957
  4. Tierney v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1964
  5. Harold H. Gearinger, as of the Estate of Royal Barry Shaw v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1969

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Yee v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1975
  2. Dorl v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1973
  3. Brenner v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1973
  4. Cooper v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1973
  5. Boyd v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1975

27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API