Legal Opinion

Bish v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided September 23, 1992No. 92-181CPublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

BRUGGINK, Judge.

Plaintiff seeks military pay for what he asserts was active duty and what the government asserts was a period after his proper dishonorable discharge from the Army. The defendant has moved to dismiss pursuant to RUSCC 12(b)(4). Because materials outside the complaint were proffered, the court notified the parties that it would treat the motion as brought pursuant to RUSCC 56, and permitted both sides to make any additional submissions. Oral argument is deemed unnecessary. For the reasons that follow, defendant’s motion is granted.

Plaintiff was a sergeant in the Army, with…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Hamon v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1986

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Earl v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1992
  2. Wilkinson v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1992

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

Powered by the Exa API