Tato v. United States
United States Court of Claims
1Opinion of the CourtWhitaker, Judge
Plaintiff, after his retirement in 1948, was employed in a civilian capacity by the Commissioned Officers Mess, United States Naval Air Station, San Diego, California, at a salary in excess of $8,000 per annum. The Comptroller General held that he came within the provisions of section 212 of the Economy Act of June 30,1932 (47 Stat. 382,406), which prohibited a “commissioned officer” from drawing retired pay so long as he held a civilian office under the United States Government the compensation of which exceeded $3,000 per annum.
At the time in question plaintiff was a commissioned warrant…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Tanner v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1954
- Hilton v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1943
3Cited by6 opinions
- Amsden v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1959
- Atkins v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1958
- Seastrom v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1959
- Norman Morris Rains v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1963
- Walter Zur-Linden v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1962
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.