Morris

Court of Claims

Morris

199 Ct. Cl. 1013, 1972 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 213, 1972 WL 5196

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedOctober 27, 1972

DocketNo. 481-71

StatusPublished

This text of 199 Ct. Cl. 1013 (Morris) 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

Morris, 199 Ct. Cl. 1013, 1972 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 213, 1972 WL 5196 (cc 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

This suit filed June 1, 1971, involves the removal on charges of plaintiff from her civilian position with the Air Force. Alleging that the removal was improper, plaintiff seeks reinstatement, recovery of back salary, interest, etc. Plaintiff contested the removal administratively; the Civil Service Commission Board of Appeals and Eeview sustained the removal on June 3, 1965. This case comes before the court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Upon consideration thereof, without oral argument, the court concludes that plaintiff’s alleged claim is barred under the doctrine of laches (see Grisham v. United States, 183 Ct. Cl. 657, 662-64, 392 F. 2d 980, 983-84 (1968), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 438; Gerstein v. United States, 176 Ct. Cl. 633, 364 F. 2d 850 (1966); and Alpert v. United States, 161 Ct. Cl. 810, 820-21 )1963)). On October 27, 1972, by order, 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

This suit filed June 1, 1971, involves the removal on charges of plaintiff from her civilian position with the Air Force. Alleging that the removal was improper, plaintiff seeks reinstatement, recovery of back salary, interest, etc. Plaintiff contested the removal administratively; the Civil Service Commission Board of Appeals and Eeview sustained the removal on June 3, 1965. This case comes before the court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Upon consideration thereof, without oral argument, the court concludes that plaintiff’s alleged claim is barred under the doctrine of laches (see Grisham v. United States, 183 Ct. Cl. 657, 662-64, 392 F. 2d 980, 983-84 (1968), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 438; Gerstein v. United States, 176 Ct. Cl. 633, 364 F. 2d 850 (1966); and Alpert v. United States, 161 Ct. Cl. 810, 820-21 )1963)). On October 27, 1972, by order, the court granted defendant’s motion and dismissed the petition.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

199 Ct. Cl. 1013, 1972 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 213, 1972 WL 5196, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/morris-cc-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack