Legal Opinion

Ralph Russell v. The United States

United States Court of Claims

Decided July 12, 1963No. 432-59PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*921JONES, Chief Judge.

The issues in this case have been narTowed to the following questions: (1) Was there a binding agreement between plaintiff and defendant to dispose of this •case on the basis of Vitarelli v. United States, 150 Ct.Cl. 59, 279 F.2d 878 (1960), and if there was such an agreement, was it binding on the court in view ■of the court’s later decision in Zeiger v. United States, No. 389-60, decided November 1, 1961, Ct.Cl., 295 F.2d 915? (2) Was the defendant justified in deducting the premiums for Federal Employees’ Group Life Insurance from the amount of back pay that was paid to…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Cole v. YoungSupreme Court of the United States · 1956
  2. William Vincent Vitarelli v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1960
  3. Hynning v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1958
  4. Isidore Zeiger v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1961
  5. Cowles v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1943

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Village of Kaktovik v. WattCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1982
  2. Ernest Paroczay v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1966
  3. Ward v. Arkansas State PoliceDistrict Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1980
  4. Peter H. Beer v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
  5. Village of Kaktovik v. James G. Watt, Secretary of the Department of the Interior, North Slope Borough v. James G. Watt, Secretary of the Department of the Interior, National Wildlife Federation v. James G. Watt, in His Official Capacity as Secretary, U. S. Department of the Interior, Amoco Production Company, Intervenor-DefendantCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1982

3 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