Baker v. United States
United States Court of Claims
The Reporters’ statement of this case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. September 30,1867, the claimant was appointed a midshipman in the Navy. The form of his appointment, being the form then in use, was as follows: “ United States oe America, Navy Department.
Read the full summary
The Reporters’ statement of this case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. September 30,1867, the claimant was appointed a midshipman in the Navy. The form of his appointment, being the form then in use, was as follows: “ United States oe America, Navy Department. “By direction of the President of the United States you are hereby appointed to the grade o'f midshipman in the United States Navy from the-day of-, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-. “ Given under my hand and seal of the Navy Department, at the city'of Washington, this-day of-, one thousand eight…
1Opinion of the CourtScofield, J.
The claimant was appointed a midshipman in the Navy September 30,1867. After completing his academic course he was promoted to ensign, July 14, 1872; December 6, 1876, he was promoted to master; and January 10,1884, be became a lieutenant, in which grade he still remains.
He sues to recover longevity pay, which he claims should be calculated according to the Act March. 3,1883 (22 Stat. L., 473). The act is as follows:
“And all officers of the Navy shall be credited with the actual time they may have served as officers or enlisted men in the regular or volunteer Army or Navy, or both, and shall…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- United States v. MooreSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- United States v. PerkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
3Cited by4 opinions
- Moser v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1907
- Broyderick v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1957
- Jasper v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1903
- Rich v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1898