Legal Opinion
John Burich v. The United States
United States Court of Claims
Decided October 14, 1966No. 156-63PublishedCited by 61 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
COLLINS, Judge.
Plaintiff, a United States deputy marshal, seeks, in this action, to recover overtime compensation alleged to be due under section 201 of the Federal Employees Pay Act of 1945, as amended. 1 The case is before us on cross-motions for summary judgment. Upon the record, which discloses no material issues oi fact, we conclude that plaintiff's motion must be denied and that defendant’s cross-motion for summary judgment must be granted.
Since 1949, plaintiff has been employed as a United States deputy marshal in the marshal’s office at San Diego, California. His duties in this…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Overnight Motor Transportation Co. v. MisselSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Tennessee Coal, Iron & Railroad v. Muscoda Local No. 123Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Soriano v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Friedman v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1962
- Missel v. Overnight Motor Transp. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1942
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by61 opinions
- Gabriel J. Martinez v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003
- Hopland Band of Pomo Indians v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
- in Winstar-Related Cases v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1997
- Francis M. Fix v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1966
- L. M. Daniels and Clayton G. Leonard v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1969
56 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.