Williams v. United States
United States Court of Claims
On the Proofs. The Reporters' statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. During the period covered by this claim Henry Williams was an assistant naval constructor in the Navy, having been appointed as such April 4,1900, after serving as a naval cadet from September 6,1894, to April 3,1900, inclusive.
Read the full summary
On the Proofs. The Reporters' statement of the case: The following are the facts of the case as found by the court: I. During the period covered by this claim Henry Williams was an assistant naval constructor in the Navy, having been appointed as such April 4,1900, after serving as a naval cadet from September 6,1894, to April 3,1900, inclusive. On October 4,1904, Assistant Naval Constructor Williams was admitted to the Naval Hospital, New York, N. Y., for treatment, and he remained in that hospital under treatment from that date until January 16, 1905, when he was discharged under an order…
1Opinion of the CourtBooth, J.
This is the claim of an assistant naval constructor for two months’ duty pay while absent on sick leave. The claimant was taken sick on October 2, 1904, while on duty at the New York Navy Yard, and placed in the New York Naval Hospital, where he received medical treatment until January 16, 1905, when he was discharged. On January 9, 1905, upon the recommendation of a board of medical survey he *58was by proper orders granted sick leave of absence for two months from January 16,1905. While in the hospital claimant received full duty pay, and for the subsequent time of two months spent by him in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Roberts v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1909