Legal Opinion

Alexander v. Fioto

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided April 4, 1977No. 75-1704PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Stevens

After World War II Congress authorized retirement pay for nonregular military personnel with at least 20 years of service in the Reserves or National Guard. However, under 10 U. S. C. § 1331 (c), those who had been in the Reserves before World War II are not eligible for benefits unless they performed active duty during wartime. Appellee had no such active duty. He contends that he may not be denied benefits for which he is otherwise eligible simply because he had prewar service in the Guard. In the District Court he argued that the statute violates the equal protection principle inherent in…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Philbrook v. GlodgettSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. Fioto v. United States Department of the ArmyDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1976

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Hardwick v. BowersCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1985
  2. Cantwell v. County of San MateoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1980
  3. Puglisi v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1977
  4. Felix v. MillikenDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1978
  5. Richardson v. SimonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1977

10 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