Sweet v. United States
United States Court of Claims
The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: The facts appear sufficiently in the opinion of the court. What the purpose of the learned counsel is in the introduction of (these) limitation statutes on fractional year’s service and the decisions of courts applying such statutory limitations on fractional year’s service of officers does not appear. Manifestly, they have no bearing whatever on the issues involved in the cases at bar.
Read the full summary
The Reporters’ statement of tbe case: The facts appear sufficiently in the opinion of the court. What the purpose of the learned counsel is in the introduction of (these) limitation statutes on fractional year’s service and the decisions of courts applying such statutory limitations on fractional year’s service of officers does not appear. Manifestly, they have no bearing whatever on the issues involved in the cases at bar. The claimants make no claim for full year’s pay for fractional year’s service, as was claimed by Hoyt in the case of Hoyt v. The United States (10 How., 108,143), cited in…
1Opinion of the CourtWeldon, J.
This is a proceeding to recover an alleged balance due the claimant as register of the land office at Grand Island, Nebr., accruing between the 24th of April, 1890, and the 30th of June, 1891. It is.alleged that the whole of the earnings to which the claimant was entitled between said dates amounts to the sum of $3,203.05, and that he has only been paid the sum of $2,913.84, leaving a balance due’ him of $289.21, and for that amount he demands a judgment. The difference between what is claimed to be due the petitioner and the amount paid to him originates from the mode adopted by the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- United States v. PhilbrickSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
3Cited by1 opinion
- Phillips v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1912