Smith

Court of Claims

Smith

164 Ct. Cl. 751, 1964 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 68, 1964 WL 1589

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedFebruary 14, 1964

DocketNo. 353-62

StatusPublished

This text of 164 Ct. Cl. 751 (Smith) 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

Smith, 164 Ct. Cl. 751, 1964 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 68, 1964 WL 1589 (cc 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

Civilian pay; laches. — Plaintiff, a former employee of the Department of Agriculture, sues to recover back pay on the ground that his dismissal from Government service was illegal. The case came before the court on the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment, defendant contending that plaintiff’s suit filed more than five years after his dismissal, was barred under the doctrine of laches. Plaintiff urged that he did not delay unduly in bringing suit and that he was carrying on a correspondence with the Civil Service Commission in relation to his case during the time in question. Upon consideration of the motions, together with oral argument and the briefs of counsel, the court concluded that the claim was barred under the doctrine of laches and on February 14,1964, it was ordered that the petition be dismissed. Cert. denied, 379 U.S. 817.

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

Civilian pay; laches. — Plaintiff, a former employee of the Department of Agriculture, sues to recover back pay on the ground that his dismissal from Government service was illegal. The case came before the court on the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment, defendant contending that plaintiff’s suit filed more than five years after his dismissal, was barred under the doctrine of laches. Plaintiff urged that he did not delay unduly in bringing suit and that he was carrying on a correspondence with the Civil Service Commission in relation to his case during the time in question. Upon consideration of the motions, together with oral argument and the briefs of counsel, the court concluded that the claim was barred under the doctrine of laches and on February 14,1964, it was ordered that the petition be dismissed. Cert. denied, 379 U.S. 817.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

164 Ct. Cl. 751, 1964 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 68, 1964 WL 1589, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-cc-1964.