Burril

Court of Claims

Burril

197 Ct. Cl. 1069, 1972 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 49, 1972 WL 5149

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedMarch 3, 1972

DocketNo. 701-71

StatusPublished

This text of 197 Ct. Cl. 1069 (Burril) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Burril, 197 Ct. Cl. 1069, 1972 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 49, 1972 WL 5149 (cc 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Military fay; limitation of actions. — Plaintiff, a Regular Army officer, was commissioned a Second Lieutenant Infantry in 1918 and was dismissed from the Army on August 7, 1919. He applied to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records for correction of his records to show “his rank as Second Lieutenant in the regular Army of the United States and that he be restored to duty and be paid the pay to which his change in grades in rank would have entitled him.” In September 1969 the Board denied plaintiff’s request for relief. Alleging that his dismissal was wrongful, illegal and unlawful, plaintiff filed his petition in this court on August 30, 1971, seeking active duty pay from August 7, 1919 to the date of judgment. This case comes before the court on defendant’s motion to dismiss the petition and on plaintiff’s motion for call as set forth at page 7 of the response to defendant’s motion. Upon consideration thereof, without oral argument, the court concludes that plaintiff’s alleged claim is barred by the statute of limitations, 28 U.S.C. § 2501. See Mathis v. United States, 183 Ct. Cl. 145, 391 F. 2d 938 (1968), rehearing granted on another ground, 183 Ct. Cl. 150, 394 F. 2d 519 (1968), 190 Ct. Cl. 925, 421 F. 2d 703 (1970). On March 3, 1972, by order, the court denied plaintiff’s motion for call, granted defendant’s motion to dismiss, and dismissed the petition.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Military fay; limitation of actions. — Plaintiff, a Regular Army officer, was commissioned a Second Lieutenant Infantry in 1918 and was dismissed from the Army on August 7, 1919. He applied to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records for correction of his records to show “his rank as Second Lieutenant in the regular Army of the United States and that he be restored to duty and be paid the pay to which his change in grades in rank would have entitled him.” In September 1969 the Board denied plaintiff’s request for relief. Alleging that his dismissal was wrongful, illegal and unlawful, plaintiff filed his petition in this court on August 30, 1971, seeking active duty pay from August 7, 1919 to the date of judgment. This case comes before the court on defendant’s motion to dismiss the petition and on plaintiff’s motion for call as set forth at page 7 of the response to defendant’s motion. Upon consideration thereof, without oral argument, the court concludes that plaintiff’s alleged claim is barred by the statute of limitations, 28 U.S.C. § 2501. See Mathis v. United States, 183 Ct. Cl. 145, 391 F. 2d 938 (1968), rehearing granted on another ground, 183 Ct. Cl. 150, 394 F. 2d 519 (1968), 190 Ct. Cl. 925, 421 F. 2d 703 (1970). On March 3, 1972, by order, the court denied plaintiff’s motion for call, granted defendant’s motion to dismiss, and dismissed the petition.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

197 Ct. Cl. 1069, 1972 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 49, 1972 WL 5149, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burril-cc-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack