Legal Opinion

Vanderpool v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided May 6, 2008No. 04-93CPublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HORN, Judge.

Plaintiffs have filed claims in this court for availability pay, which is “a form of premium pay for law enforcement officers designed to provide compensation for unscheduled overtime work that the employee performs or is available to perform.” Caven v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 392 F.3d 1378, 1379 (Fed.Cir. 2004).1 Plaintiffs rely on the Law Enforcement Availability Pay Act of 1994 (LEAPA), Pub.L. No. 103-329, § 633, 108 Stat. 2425 (codified as amended at 5 U.S.C. § 5545a (2000)) for jurisdiction in this court.

In response to the plaintiffs’ complaint, the government filed a…

2Cases cited77 opinions

  1. Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  2. Abbott Laboratories v. GardnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Immigration & Naturalization Service v. St. CyrSupreme Court of the United States · 2001
  4. United States v. TestanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  5. United States v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1983

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Horvath v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API