Opinion

Eicks v. United States

  • 172 F. Supp. 445
  • 145 Ct. Cl. 522
  • 1959 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 101
Court
United States Court of Claims
Filed
Apr 8, 1959
Status
Published
Author
Laramore
On the bench
Reed, Laramore
Cited by
16 cases
Authority
More cited than 9.2%

The opinion

LARAMORE, Judge

(dissenting).

I am unable to agree with the majority for this reason: Prior to the enactment of the Armed Forces Leave Act of 1946, 60 Stat. 963 , 37 U.S.C.A. § 31a et seq., the granting of leave was a discretionary act of the secretary concerned. It was not until the amendment of the above act in 1947, 61 Stat. 748 , that officers were entitled to be compensated for leave accrued but not taken prior to separation. Consequently, I believe the court’s decision in Pollard v. United States, cited and relied on in the majority opinion, to be in error, in conflict with prior decisions of this court, and should be overruled. Scott v. United States, 107 F.Supp. 846 , 123 Ct.Cl. 547 ; Ferrer v. United States, 140 F.Supp. 954 , 132 Ct.Cl. 422 .

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.