Hanson

Court of Claims

Hanson

185 Ct. Cl. 798, 1968 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 182, 1968 WL 2168

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedNovember 29, 1968

DocketNo. 228-67

StatusPublished

This text of 185 Ct. Cl. 798 (Hanson) 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

Hanson, 185 Ct. Cl. 798, 1968 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 182, 1968 WL 2168 (cc 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Ovoilian fay; iwooluntary retirement; laches. — Plaintiff was employed by the Government from 1946 until December 28,1960, at which time she was separated and retired for disability, plaintiff alleging she was involuntarily retired and had made efforts to resume employment with the Government. Plaintiff exhausted her administrative remedies, and on January 6,1966, she filed a petition in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, seeking back pay and damages totaling $50,000. The case was [799]*799transferred to the Court of Claims on August 3, 1967. Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment claiming laches, since there was a lapse of over 5 years from plaintiff’s retirement until the filing of the petition which delay was prejudicial to defendant. The court concluded that plaintiff’s alleged claim is barred by the doctrine of laches, on the basis of decisions by this court in Albert v. United States, 161 Ct. Cl. 810 (1963) ; Lusk v. United States, 173 Ct. Cl. 291 (1965), cert. denied, 383 U.S. 967 (1966); Gersten v. United States, 176 Ct. Cl. 633, 364 F. 2d 850 (1966) ; and Jackson v. United States, 179 Ct. Cl. 29, cert. denied, 389 U.S. 985 (1967). On November 29,1968, the court granted defendant’s motion and dismissed the petition.

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

Ovoilian fay; iwooluntary retirement; laches. — Plaintiff was employed by the Government from 1946 until December 28,1960, at which time she was separated and retired for disability, plaintiff alleging she was involuntarily retired and had made efforts to resume employment with the Government. Plaintiff exhausted her administrative remedies, and on January 6,1966, she filed a petition in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, seeking back pay and damages totaling $50,000. The case was [799]*799transferred to the Court of Claims on August 3, 1967. Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment claiming laches, since there was a lapse of over 5 years from plaintiff’s retirement until the filing of the petition which delay was prejudicial to defendant. The court concluded that plaintiff’s alleged claim is barred by the doctrine of laches, on the basis of decisions by this court in Albert v. United States, 161 Ct. Cl. 810 (1963) ; Lusk v. United States, 173 Ct. Cl. 291 (1965), cert. denied, 383 U.S. 967 (1966); Gersten v. United States, 176 Ct. Cl. 633, 364 F. 2d 850 (1966) ; and Jackson v. United States, 179 Ct. Cl. 29, cert. denied, 389 U.S. 985 (1967). On November 29,1968, the court granted defendant’s motion and dismissed the petition.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

185 Ct. Cl. 798, 1968 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 182, 1968 WL 2168, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hanson-cc-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack