Legal Opinion · Dissent

Eicks v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided April 8, 1959No. 457-55Published

1DissentLaramore, Judge

I am unable to agree with the majority for this reason: Prior to the enactment of the Armed Forces Leave Act of 1946, 60 Stat. 963, 37 U.S.C.A. § 31a et seq., the granting of leave was a discretionary act of the secretary concerned. It was not until the amendment of the above act in 1947, 61 Stat. 748, that officers were entitled to be compensated for leave accrued but not taken prior to separation. Consequently, I believe the court’s decision in Pollard v. United States, cited and relied on in the majority opinion, to be in error, in conflict with prior decisions of this court, and should be…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Ferrer v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1955
  2. Scott v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1952

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

Powered by the Exa API