Smith v. United States

Court of Claims

Smith v. United States

75 Ct. Cl. 514, 1932 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 371, 1932 WL 2063

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedJune 6, 1932

DocketNo. L-462

StatusPublished

This text of 75 Ct. Cl. 514 (Smith v. United States) 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 v. United States, 75 Ct. Cl. 514, 1932 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 371, 1932 WL 2063 (cc 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

GeeeN, Judge,

delivered the opinion:

This is a case in which the plaintiff, a naval officer, seeks to recover additional rental and subsistence allowances on account of having been the chief support of his mother. The only defense is that it does not satisfactorily, appear from the evidence that plaintiff’s mother could not have earned [516]*516more money than she did by engaging in a more gainful occupation or working more time than is shown by the evidence. As the testimony shows beyond controversy that the plaintiff was the chief support of his mother during the period in question, we do not think this is sufficient to defeat his claim. The testimony of his mother was to the effect that her health was not good, that she worked part of the time as a practical nurse, and that her age at the beginning of the period for which plaintiff asked an allowance was forty-nine years.

The statute does not make it a condition of the allowance that the parent should seek employment, and work to the extent of his or her power and ability. The difficulty in administering such a provision might be one reason for not making it, and the obvious intent of the statute is to make an allowance to the officer where he has been the chief support of a dependent- parent without imposing this condition. We think the case of the plaintiff comes within the statute, and judgment will be rendered accordingly.

Whaley, Judge; Williams, Judge; LittletoN, Judge; and Booth, Ghief Justice, concur.

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

GeeeN, Judge,

delivered the opinion:

This is a case in which the plaintiff, a naval officer, seeks to recover additional rental and subsistence allowances on account of having been the chief support of his mother. The only defense is that it does not satisfactorily, appear from the evidence that plaintiff’s mother could not have earned [516]*516more money than she did by engaging in a more gainful occupation or working more time than is shown by the evidence. As the testimony shows beyond controversy that the plaintiff was the chief support of his mother during the period in question, we do not think this is sufficient to defeat his claim. The testimony of his mother was to the effect that her health was not good, that she worked part of the time as a practical nurse, and that her age at the beginning of the period for which plaintiff asked an allowance was forty-nine years.

The statute does not make it a condition of the allowance that the parent should seek employment, and work to the extent of his or her power and ability. The difficulty in administering such a provision might be one reason for not making it, and the obvious intent of the statute is to make an allowance to the officer where he has been the chief support of a dependent- parent without imposing this condition. We think the case of the plaintiff comes within the statute, and judgment will be rendered accordingly.

Whaley, Judge; Williams, Judge; LittletoN, Judge; and Booth, Ghief Justice, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

75 Ct. Cl. 514, 1932 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 371, 1932 WL 2063, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-united-states-cc-1932.