Legal Opinion

Cameron v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Decided November 18, 2013No. 19-1923UnpublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

RADER, Chief Judge.

The Court of Federal Claims found that Col. Daniel Cameron, a retired officer of the Oregon National Guard, was not improperly denied consideration by a retention board before he was discharged from active duty. Because the army regulations in effect at the time entitled Col. Cameron to review by a retention board, this court reverses and remands.

I

Col. Cameron enlisted in the Army in 1981, accepted a commission as a U.S. Army Reserve Corps officer in 1983, and entered the Active Guard Reserve (AGR) under Title 32 for the Oregon National Guard in 1998. In 2003, he received…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Auer v. RobbinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  2. Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1945
  3. United States v. LarionoffSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  4. Christopher v. Smithkline Beecham Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 2012
  5. Reflectone, Inc. v. John H. Dalton, Secretary of the NavyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Miller v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015
  2. Williams v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2014
  3. Brass v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015
  4. Clark v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2025
  5. Wollman v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2014

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API