United States v. Foster
Supreme Court of the United States
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. This was an appeal from a judgment against the United States in favor of the plaintiff, Foster, for the sum of $1393.40, as the amount due him under what is known as the longevity, acts of Congress. Prior to November 28, 1861, he served in the navy as an enlisted man for six years and forty days; and he served as gunner in the regular navy from November 28, 1861, until April 14, 1868, a period of six; years and 145 days, when he resigned.
Read the full summary
APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS. This was an appeal from a judgment against the United States in favor of the plaintiff, Foster, for the sum of $1393.40, as the amount due him under what is known as the longevity, acts of Congress. Prior to November 28, 1861, he served in the navy as an enlisted man for six years and forty days; and he served as gunner in the regular navy from November 28, 1861, until April 14, 1868, a period of six; years and 145 days, when he resigned. He was reappointed gunner December 27, 1869, since which date he served continuously in that capacity. Nnder the longevity…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Harlan
There is no claim that the plaintiff did not receive, on his first warrant as gunner, that is, for the whole period of his first continuous service in that position, all the compensation to which' he was entitled as gunner, under the law as it was during that period. And it is found, in effect, that he has received credit, on his second warrant as gunner, for the actual time of his entire service prior to December 27, 1869, both as enlisted man and gunner, counting such service as if it had been continuous and in the regular navy in the lowest grade, having graduated pay held by him after he…
2Cited by2 opinions
- United States v. AlgerSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Royce v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1901