Kephart v. United States
United States Court of Claims
1Opinion of the Court
HOWELL, Judge.
The defendant’s motion for a new trial is based upon two grounds, first, the court erred in holding that plaintiff, as an employee of the Federal Government, had a right to sue the United States for benefits to which he was allegedly entitled under Public Resolution No. 96, approved August 27, 1940, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 401 et seq., as amended by the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 308; second, that it was error to decide plaintiff was entitled to recover.
Defendant again calls the attention of the court to the cases of Insular Police…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Insular Police Commission v. LopezCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1947
- Strong v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1925
- Ballf v. KranzCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1936
- Danford v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1926
- Moore v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1868
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Thomas Henry Carter v. United States of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1968
- Gilman J. Chasse v. Robert E. ChasenCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1979
- Northern Indian Housing & Development Council v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1987
- Gilman J. Chasse v. Robert E. ChasenCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1979
- McEachern v. United StatesDistrict Court, W.D. South Carolina · 1949
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.