Farley v. United States
This text of 125 Ct. Cl. 378 (Farley v. United States) 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
delivered the opinion of the court:
Plaintiff seeks to recover certain overtime compensation and additional “night pay differential” allegedly due her arising from employment as a correctional officer at the Federal Eeformatory for Women, Alderson, West Virginia. Both parties have moved for summary judgment on the ground that no issue of material fact is presented. We feel that both motions must be denied.
The questions presented entail a construction of The Federal Employees Pay Act of 1945, 59 Stat. 295, and, more particularly, a determination of what constitutes “hours of employment” as that term is used in section 201. In determinations of this kind the facts of a particular case are important. See: Skidmore v. Swift and Company, 323 U. S. 134; Armour and Company v. Wantock, 323 U. S. 126. In the instant case the record discloses controversy as to facts material to a proper disposition of the case. Summary judgment under such circumstances would be inappropriate. Baxters. United States, 122 C. Cls. 632.
The motions for summary judgment are denied and the case referred to a commissioner of this court for further proceedings.
It is so ordered.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
125 Ct. Cl. 378, 1953 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 166, 1953 WL 6154, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/farley-v-united-states-cc-1953.