Legal Opinion

Miller v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided March 7, 1938No. 43625PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWhaley, Judge

In the act of August 17, 1912, 37 Stat. 311, 313, Congress centralized all pension agencies in Washington and repealed the prior law, which provided agencies at a number of places throughout the United States. Among other provisions in the new plan, the Act provided for and created the office or position of Disbursing Clerk for the payment of pensions in the following language:

For salary of one disbursing clerk for the payment of pensions, to be selected and appointed by the Secretary of the Interior, at the rate of four thousand dollars per annum, during the last five months of the fiscal…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Ex Parte Crow DogSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
  2. Ex Parte YergerSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
  3. Chew Heong v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  4. Minis v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1841
  5. United States v. LangstonSupreme Court of the United States · 1886

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Borak v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1948
  2. Lovett v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1945
  3. National Ass'n of Regional Councils v. CostleCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1977
  4. National Association Of Regional Councils v. Douglas M. CostleCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1977
  5. Dickerson v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1939

4 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