disallowing the government’s set off because the evidence established that the plaintiff had actually engaged in moonlighting while on active service
How later courts described this case
- disallowing the government’s set off because the evidence established that the plaintiff had actually engaged in moonlighting while on active service
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Jones, Chief Judge,
dissenting:
I am unable to agree with the conclusion reached by the majority. Under the authority of Borak v. United States, 110 C. Cls. 236 , and Kaufman v. United States, 118 C. Cls. 91 , 93 F. Supp. 1019 , construing 28 U. S. C. 250 (2), Judicial Code § 145 (2), and 28 U. S. C. 265, Judicial Code § 159, defendant should be allowed to setoff against plaintiff’s claim any amount earned by outside employment during the'period involved.