Legal Opinion

Griffin v. United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided February 22, 1978No. 178-77PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Per curiam

The plaintiff, an officer in the United

States Air Force, received an award under 10 U.S.C. § 1124 for a meritorious suggestion, namely the use of periscopes *712for certain purposes in the Minuteman missile silos. He contends that the award is insufficient, and in arriving at the amount thereof, aggregating $8,905, the Air Force has been arbitrary and capricious, and has failed to follow its own regulations, according to him. Defendant moves for summary judgment, but we conclude that there are issues of fact requiring trial.

Defendant’s first point is that making any such award is discretionary,…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. United States v. TestanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Schillinger v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
  3. Keco Industries, Inc. v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1970
  4. Heyer Products Company v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1956
  5. United States v. Berdan Fire-Arms Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1895

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Army and Air Force Exchange Service v. SheehanSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Carruth v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1980
  3. Leesona Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1979
  4. Connolly v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1982
  5. Contreras v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2005

18 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