Forster v. United States

Court of Claims

Forster v. United States

101 Ct. Cl. 424, 1943 WL 4269

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedOctober 4, 1943

DocketNo. 45646

StatusPublished

This text of 101 Ct. Cl. 424 (Forster 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

Forster v. United States, 101 Ct. Cl. 424, 1943 WL 4269 (cc 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

[427]*427The court decided that the plaintiff was entitled to recover, in an opinion per curiam as follows:

Plaintiff sues for the rental and subsistence allowances of a naval officer with a dependent mother, from June 16,1941, to the date of judgment herein. We have found that his mother was in fact dependent upon him. Plaintiff having been on sea duty during the period of the claim, he is entitled to the full rental allowance of an officer of his rank, with a dependent mother. Section 6 of the act of June 10, 1922, as amended by section 2 of the act of May 31, 1924, 43 Stat. 250, was so construed by this court in Ageton v. United States, 95 C. Cls. 718. See also Donald K. Mumma v. United States, decided February 1, 1943, 99 C. Cls. 261. He is also entitled to the subsistence allowances of an officer with a dependent mother.

Entry of judgment will be suspended pending the filing of a report from the General Accounting Office showing the amount due in accordance with this opinion.

In accordance with the above opinion and upon a report from the General Accounting Office showing the amount due thereunder to be $3,640.40, and upon plaintiff’s motion for judgment, it was ordered April 3, 1944, that judgment for the plaintiff be entered in the sum of $3,640.40.

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

[427]*427The court decided that the plaintiff was entitled to recover, in an opinion per curiam as follows:

Plaintiff sues for the rental and subsistence allowances of a naval officer with a dependent mother, from June 16,1941, to the date of judgment herein. We have found that his mother was in fact dependent upon him. Plaintiff having been on sea duty during the period of the claim, he is entitled to the full rental allowance of an officer of his rank, with a dependent mother. Section 6 of the act of June 10, 1922, as amended by section 2 of the act of May 31, 1924, 43 Stat. 250, was so construed by this court in Ageton v. United States, 95 C. Cls. 718. See also Donald K. Mumma v. United States, decided February 1, 1943, 99 C. Cls. 261. He is also entitled to the subsistence allowances of an officer with a dependent mother.

Entry of judgment will be suspended pending the filing of a report from the General Accounting Office showing the amount due in accordance with this opinion.

In accordance with the above opinion and upon a report from the General Accounting Office showing the amount due thereunder to be $3,640.40, and upon plaintiff’s motion for judgment, it was ordered April 3, 1944, that judgment for the plaintiff be entered in the sum of $3,640.40.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

101 Ct. Cl. 424, 1943 WL 4269, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/forster-v-united-states-cc-1943.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack