Miller

Court of Claims

Miller

193 Ct. Cl. 1099, 1971 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 102, 1971 WL 4109

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedJanuary 15, 1971

DocketNo. 151-70

StatusPublished

This text of 193 Ct. Cl. 1099 (Miller) 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

Miller, 193 Ct. Cl. 1099, 1971 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 102, 1971 WL 4109 (cc 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

Civilian fay; jurisdiction of the Court of Claims; dismissal; administrative decision. — Plaintiff, who was dismissed from his position at the United States Penitentiary, Atlanta, Georgia, on the ground that he had, for the second time within 9 months, reported for duty under the influence of alcohol, seeks reinstatement, correction of his personnel file, and back pay with interest. This case comes before the court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Upon consideration thereof, together with plaintiff’s response in opposition thereto, without oral argument, the court concludes that as to plaintiff’s claims for relief as to reinstatement, correction of his personnel file and payment of interest, plaintiff’s petition fails to state a claim within the jurisdiction of this court. (See United States v. King, 395 U.S. 1 (1969); Peters v. United States, 187 Ct. Cl. 63, 408 F. 2d 719 (1969); Ainsworth v. United States, 185 Ct. Cl. 110, 399 F. 2d 176 (1968) ; Edgar v. United States, 145 Ct. Cl. 9, 171 F. Supp. 243 (1959); 28 U.S.C. §1491 and 28 U.S.C. §2516 (1964 ed.)). The court further concludes that as to plaintiff’s claim for back pay, plaintiff has failed to show that there was procedural error or that the findings and proceedings [1100]*1100Avere unsupported by substantial evidence. On January 15, 1971 the court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the petition.

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

Civilian fay; jurisdiction of the Court of Claims; dismissal; administrative decision. — Plaintiff, who was dismissed from his position at the United States Penitentiary, Atlanta, Georgia, on the ground that he had, for the second time within 9 months, reported for duty under the influence of alcohol, seeks reinstatement, correction of his personnel file, and back pay with interest. This case comes before the court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Upon consideration thereof, together with plaintiff’s response in opposition thereto, without oral argument, the court concludes that as to plaintiff’s claims for relief as to reinstatement, correction of his personnel file and payment of interest, plaintiff’s petition fails to state a claim within the jurisdiction of this court. (See United States v. King, 395 U.S. 1 (1969); Peters v. United States, 187 Ct. Cl. 63, 408 F. 2d 719 (1969); Ainsworth v. United States, 185 Ct. Cl. 110, 399 F. 2d 176 (1968) ; Edgar v. United States, 145 Ct. Cl. 9, 171 F. Supp. 243 (1959); 28 U.S.C. §1491 and 28 U.S.C. §2516 (1964 ed.)). The court further concludes that as to plaintiff’s claim for back pay, plaintiff has failed to show that there was procedural error or that the findings and proceedings [1100]*1100Avere unsupported by substantial evidence. On January 15, 1971 the court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the petition.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

193 Ct. Cl. 1099, 1971 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 102, 1971 WL 4109, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miller-cc-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack