Grose

Court of Claims

Grose

506 F.2d 1406, 205 Ct. Cl. 845, 1974 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 58

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedOctober 25, 1974

DocketNo. 415-73

StatusPublished

This text of 506 F.2d 1406 (Grose) 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

Grose, 506 F.2d 1406, 205 Ct. Cl. 845, 1974 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 58 (cc 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

Oimilia/n pay; dismissal; laches. — Plaintiff, a former employee of the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard, seeks back pay from November 1967 to date of judgment for alleged illegal removal from his job. On March 15, 1968 the Civil Service Commission Board of Appeals and Keview upheld the decision of the Philadelphia Regional Office that plaintiff’s appeal from the decision of the Naval Shipyard to remove him was untimely. On October 25, 1974 the court issued the following order:

Before Davis, Judge, Presiding, SkeltoN and KtjNzig, Judges.

“This case comes before the court on defendant’s motion, filed April 4,1974, for summary judgment. Upon consideration thereof, together with the opposition thereto, without [846]*846oral argument, it is concluded that plaintiff’s alleged claim is barred under the doctrine of laches, there having elapsed a period of approximately 5% years from the time of the final decision of the Board of Appeals and Review and his bringing of an action in this court, and on the basis of the decisions in Cason v. United States, 200 Ct. Cl. 424, 431, 471 F. 2d 1225, 1229 (1973) ; Grisham v. United States, 183 Ct. Cl. 657, 662-64, 392 F. 2d 980, 983-84, cert. denied, 393 U.S. 843 (1968) ; and Gersten v. United States, 176 Ct. Cl. 633, 635, 364 F. 2d 850, 852 (1966),

“it is ordered that defendant’s said motion for summary judgment 'be and the same is granted and plaintiff’s petition is dismissed.”

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

Oimilia/n pay; dismissal; laches. — Plaintiff, a former employee of the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard, seeks back pay from November 1967 to date of judgment for alleged illegal removal from his job. On March 15, 1968 the Civil Service Commission Board of Appeals and Keview upheld the decision of the Philadelphia Regional Office that plaintiff’s appeal from the decision of the Naval Shipyard to remove him was untimely. On October 25, 1974 the court issued the following order:

Before Davis, Judge, Presiding, SkeltoN and KtjNzig, Judges.

“This case comes before the court on defendant’s motion, filed April 4,1974, for summary judgment. Upon consideration thereof, together with the opposition thereto, without [846]*846oral argument, it is concluded that plaintiff’s alleged claim is barred under the doctrine of laches, there having elapsed a period of approximately 5% years from the time of the final decision of the Board of Appeals and Review and his bringing of an action in this court, and on the basis of the decisions in Cason v. United States, 200 Ct. Cl. 424, 431, 471 F. 2d 1225, 1229 (1973) ; Grisham v. United States, 183 Ct. Cl. 657, 662-64, 392 F. 2d 980, 983-84, cert. denied, 393 U.S. 843 (1968) ; and Gersten v. United States, 176 Ct. Cl. 633, 635, 364 F. 2d 850, 852 (1966),

“it is ordered that defendant’s said motion for summary judgment 'be and the same is granted and plaintiff’s petition is dismissed.”

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

506 F.2d 1406, 205 Ct. Cl. 845, 1974 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 58, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grose-cc-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack