Perkins v. United States
United States Court of Claims
The Reporters’ statement of the ease: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. In 1877 claimant entered the Naval Academy as a cadet-engineer, and on June 10,1881, having successfully passed the final academic examination, received the following certificate, signed by the .officers of the Academy: “UNITED STATES NAVAL ACADEMY.
Read the full summary
The Reporters’ statement of the ease: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. In 1877 claimant entered the Naval Academy as a cadet-engineer, and on June 10,1881, having successfully passed the final academic examination, received the following certificate, signed by the .officers of the Academy: “UNITED STATES NAVAL ACADEMY. “This certifies that Cadet-Engineer Lyman B. Perkins has completed the prescribed course of study at the United States Naval Academy, and has successfully passed the required examination before the Academic Board. “In witness whereof we have…
1Opinion of the Court
Richardson, Ch. J.,
delivered the opinion of the court:
In the case of Leopold v. The United States (18 C. Cls. R., 546) this court held that cadet-engineers who had finished their four years’ course at the Naval Academy, passed their final academic examinations, and received their diplomas before the passage of the act of August 5, 1882 (22 Stat. L., 285), became graduates and were not made naval cadets; that they are entitled to the pay provided by Be vised Statutes, section 1556, p. 268, for cadet-engineers after final academic examination and until warranted as assistant engineers, and that…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- United States v. HartwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1868
- Ex Parte Duncan N. HennenSupreme Court of the United States · 1839
- Blake v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Kaufman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Keyes v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2020
- McLean v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1910
- Nicholas v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1918
- Crygier v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1890
- Polaris Innovations Limited v. Kingston Technology Co. Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2020