Collom
This text of 181 Ct. Cl. 1204 (Collom) 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.
Opinion
Oimilian fay; red/action in force; rule to show cause.— Plaintiff, formerly employed as a civilian Production Specialist, GS-9, at Headquarters, Air Materiel Force, European Area, Chateauroux, France, sues to recover back pay from the date of his separation by reduction in force on April 30, 1959. The case came before the court on a rule to show cause why the petition should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution, which rule was made returnable at 10:00 o’clock, a.m., Monday, December 4,1967, and was at that time taken under submission by the court on failure of response thereto by or on behalf of the plaintiff. Upon consideration thereof, the court on December 18,1967, ordered that the rule to show cause be and the same was made absolute and the petition was dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
181 Ct. Cl. 1204, 1967 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 181, 1967 WL 1587, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/collom-cc-1967.