Grealish v. United States
United States Court of Claims
The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. The claimant is an ordnance storekeeper of the Commissary Department of the Army, and has been so since 1867. He was on duty as acting assistant commissary ,of subsistence from December 1, 1867, to August 9,1876, and from May 15, 1876, to March 31, 1884. He has not been paid for such service tbe $100 per annum provided by the act of July 15,1870, ch. 294, sec. 24 (16 Stat.…
Read the full summary
The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. The claimant is an ordnance storekeeper of the Commissary Department of the Army, and has been so since 1867. He was on duty as acting assistant commissary ,of subsistence from December 1, 1867, to August 9,1876, and from May 15, 1876, to March 31, 1884. He has not been paid for such service tbe $100 per annum provided by the act of July 15,1870, ch. 294, sec. 24 (16 Stat. L., 320), and Eevised Statutes, sec. 1261.
1Opinion of the Court
Richardson, Ch. J.,
delivered the opinion of the court:
The claimant, an officer of the Army, having been acting assistant commissary, which is nob of itself an office, but only an assignment to additional duty, for which a compensation of $100 a year is allowed by Eevised Statutes, sec. 1261, is entitled to recover that amount for the sis years immediately previous to bringing this action. The case is ruled by that of Morrison v. The United States (13 C. Cls. R., 1; affirmed on appeal, 96 U. S. R., 232).
No recovery can be had in this court for any period earlier than said six years, by reason…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- United States v. MorrisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Morrison v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1877