Ferris v. United States

Court of Claims

Ferris v. United States

57 Ct. Cl. 566, 1922 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 289, 1922 WL 1832

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedNovember 6, 1922

DocketNo. 315-A

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 57 Ct. Cl. 566 (Ferris 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.

Bluebook

Ferris v. United States, 57 Ct. Cl. 566, 1922 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 289, 1922 WL 1832 (cc 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

[568]*568MEMORANDUM BX THE COURT.

This is a suit brought by the plaintiff to recover increased pay and allowances for exercising a command above that pertaining to his grade from August 27, 1917, to January 5,1918.

Fie relies upon the act of Congress approved April 26, 1898, 30 Stat. 365, which reads as follows:

“That in time of war every officer serving with troops operating against an enemy, who shall exercise, under an assignment in orders issued by competent authority, a command above that pertaining to his grade shall be entitled to receive the pay and allowances of the grade appropriate to the command so exercised.”

The plaintiff was a lieutenant colonel of the 314th Field Artillery, and was by orders issued by competent authority under assignment to command the 315th Field Artillery, and exercised said command from August 27, 1917, to January 5, 1918. These two regiments of Field Artillery were in the 80th Division of the National Army organized for the purpose of carrying on the war, which was then being waged [569]*569between the United States and Germany. These regiments were organized and trained at Camp Lee, Virginia, and it was while they were being so organized and trained that the plaintiff rendered the service and exercised the command for which he is now claiming increased pay and allowances.

The troops which were being organized and trained at Camp Lee were assembled there for war purposes, and were necessarily operating against the enemy. They were there for no other purpose. Therefore the service rendered by the plaintiff was with troops operating against the enemy within the meaning of the statute. As was said in 22 Ops. Atty. Gen. 95—

“ Any troops assembled at camps in the United States for * * * war purposes can properly be considered as operating against an enemy although their * * * service is confined to the ordinary routine of camp life.”

The plaintiff is entitled to recover, and judgment will be rendered in his favor for $179.17.

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

[568]*568MEMORANDUM BX THE COURT.

This is a suit brought by the plaintiff to recover increased pay and allowances for exercising a command above that pertaining to his grade from August 27, 1917, to January 5,1918.

Fie relies upon the act of Congress approved April 26, 1898, 30 Stat. 365, which reads as follows:

“That in time of war every officer serving with troops operating against an enemy, who shall exercise, under an assignment in orders issued by competent authority, a command above that pertaining to his grade shall be entitled to receive the pay and allowances of the grade appropriate to the command so exercised.”

The plaintiff was a lieutenant colonel of the 314th Field Artillery, and was by orders issued by competent authority under assignment to command the 315th Field Artillery, and exercised said command from August 27, 1917, to January 5, 1918. These two regiments of Field Artillery were in the 80th Division of the National Army organized for the purpose of carrying on the war, which was then being waged [569]*569between the United States and Germany. These regiments were organized and trained at Camp Lee, Virginia, and it was while they were being so organized and trained that the plaintiff rendered the service and exercised the command for which he is now claiming increased pay and allowances.

The troops which were being organized and trained at Camp Lee were assembled there for war purposes, and were necessarily operating against the enemy. They were there for no other purpose. Therefore the service rendered by the plaintiff was with troops operating against the enemy within the meaning of the statute. As was said in 22 Ops. Atty. Gen. 95—

“ Any troops assembled at camps in the United States for * * * war purposes can properly be considered as operating against an enemy although their * * * service is confined to the ordinary routine of camp life.”

The plaintiff is entitled to recover, and judgment will be rendered in his favor for $179.17.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

57 Ct. Cl. 566, 1922 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 289, 1922 WL 1832, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ferris-v-united-states-cc-1922.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack