Barr v. United States
United States Court of Claims
The Reporters'statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. -On the 14th of June, 1877, the claimant was a major in the Army of the United States, and on duty as judge-advocate of the Department of Dakota, at the headquarters of said department, Saint Paul, Minn. II.
Read the full summary
The Reporters'statement of the case: The following are the facts as found by the court: I. -On the 14th of June, 1877, the claimant was a major in the Army of the United States, and on duty as judge-advocate of the Department of Dakota, at the headquarters of said department, Saint Paul, Minn. II. On said 14th day of June leave of absence was granted to said claimant for one month, with leave to apply at headquarters, Military Division of the Missouri, for an extension of one month. III. On the 25th day of June, 1877, an extension of claimant’s leave of absence of one month was granted by the…
1Opinion of the CourtDavis, J.
In Juné, 1877, the claimant, a major in the Army of the United States, was stationed at Saint Paul, in Minnesota. On the 14th of that month he loft Saint Paul on a leave of absence and visited Washington. While on leave of absence at Washington, he was ordered to report for temporary duty to the Judge-Advocate of the Army, at Washington, and was detained there on such *275temporary duty until after the expiration of Ms leave of absence. He was then ordered to rejoin Ms proper station, and did so. Under these circumstances he claimed mileage from Washington to Saint Paul, which claim was…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Foster v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1908
- Moore v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1913