Legal Opinion

Naomi Glushakow Denenberg v. The United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided July 18, 1962No. 413-60PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DURFEE, Judge.

Plaintiff was injured in the course of employment as a civilian employee of the U. S. Navy Exchange (U. S. Navy Ship’s Store Office, U. S. Naval Facility, London, England), a nonappropriated funds activity. She seeks recovery of compensation benefits alleged to be due her under the Act of June 19, 1952, 5 U.S.C.A. §§ 150k and 150k-!, 1 which provides as follows:

“Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That: civilian employees, compensated from nonappropriated funds, of the Army and Air Force Exchange…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Aircraft & Diesel Equipment Corp. v. HirschSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. United States v. Blair Ex Rel. Roanoke Marble & Granite Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
  3. Leland K. Aubrey and Charlotte R. Aubrey v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1958

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. United States v. DemkoSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. Wright v. MooreLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1979
  3. Howard v. Bradshaw and Ona Bradshaw v. United States of America, Howard v. Bradshaw and Ona Bradshaw v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1971
  4. Glen P. Gradall v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1963
  5. United States v. DemkoSupreme Court of the United States · 1966

1 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