Legal Opinion
Christensen v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
Decided March 23, 2004No. 00-355CPublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
LETTOW, Judge.
The plaintiffs in this class action were colonels in the Ah’ Force who were selected for involuntary retirement in 1994. They raise claims for monetary damages based on the Military Pay Act, 37 U.S.C. § 204, and they also seek reinstatement. The certified opt-in class consists of all officers who were selected for involuntary retirement by the Fiscal Year 1994B Colonel Selective Early Retirement Board (“Retirement Board” or “Board”). See Christensen v. United States, 49 Fed.Cl. 165,167-68 (2001) (granting plaintiffs’ motion to certify).1 Their claims are…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Mt. Healthy City School District Board of Education v. DoyleSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Village of Arlington Heights v. Metropolitan Housing Development Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Price Waterhouse v. HopkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- PGBA, LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2004
- Christensen v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2005
- Byrum v. WinterDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2011
- Brooks v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2005
- Metz v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2004
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.