Opinion

Lezin v. United States

  • 98 F. Supp. 574
  • 120 Ct. Cl. 724
  • 1951 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 93
Court
United States Court of Claims
Filed
Jul 9, 1951
Status
Published
Author
Whitakeb
On the bench
Howell, Jorras, Lutletox, Madden, Ohief, Whitakeb
Cited by
11 cases
Authority
More cited than 12.6%

The opinion

Whitakeb, Judge,

concurring:

I concur on the ground that plaintiff is entitled to the benefits of the Act of June 10, 1948. I do not think he is otherwise entitled to recover his salary from the date of his second discharge to the date of his reinstatement. I see no distinction between this case and Ginn v. United States, 110 C. Cls. 637 . That decision, I think, was correct, and was required by Eberlein v. United States, 257 U. S. 82 .

Howell, Judge; Lutletox, Judge; and Jorras, Ohief Judge, concur in the foregoing concurring opinion.

On October 2, 1951, on a stipulation filed by the parties, judgment was entered for $12,060.59, “without deduction for income tax or retirement.”

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.