Walter N. Tobriner v. John J. O'donnell, Jr.

D.C. Circuit

Walter N. Tobriner v. John J. O'donnell, Jr.

336 F.2d 742, 118 U.S. App. D.C. 354, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 5025

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedJune 18, 1964

Docket18317_1

StatusPublished

This text of 336 F.2d 742 (Walter N. Tobriner v. John J. O'donnell, Jr.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Walter N. Tobriner v. John J. O'donnell, Jr., 336 F.2d 742, 118 U.S. App. D.C. 354, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 5025 (D.C. Cir. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Appellee became disabled, not in performance of duty, after serving four years and nearly ten months as a member of the Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia. Read in connection with § 4-521(1), D.C.Code (1961) § 4-526 provides that when a member of the Police or Fire Department “completes five years of police or fire service and is * * * disabled due to injury received or disease contracted other than in the performance of duty”, he shall be retired on an annuity of at least 40 per cent of his salary. Appellee contends that former military service should be counted and that he therefore has five years of “police or fire service.” This contention contradicts the plain meaning of the quoted words. Moreover, § 4-521(10) of the Code defines “police or fire service” as “honorable service in the Metropolitan Police Department, White House Police force, Fire Department of the District of Columbia, the United States Park Police force, and the United States Secret Service * * * ” The District Court erred in entering summary judgment for appellee. Summary judgment should be entered for appellants.

Reversed.

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

PER CURIAM:

Appellee became disabled, not in performance of duty, after serving four years and nearly ten months as a member of the Metropolitan Police Department of the District of Columbia. Read in connection with § 4-521(1), D.C.Code (1961) § 4-526 provides that when a member of the Police or Fire Department “completes five years of police or fire service and is * * * disabled due to injury received or disease contracted other than in the performance of duty”, he shall be retired on an annuity of at least 40 per cent of his salary. Appellee contends that former military service should be counted and that he therefore has five years of “police or fire service.” This contention contradicts the plain meaning of the quoted words. Moreover, § 4-521(10) of the Code defines “police or fire service” as “honorable service in the Metropolitan Police Department, White House Police force, Fire Department of the District of Columbia, the United States Park Police force, and the United States Secret Service * * * ” The District Court erred in entering summary judgment for appellee. Summary judgment should be entered for appellants.

Reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

336 F.2d 742, 118 U.S. App. D.C. 354, 1964 U.S. App. LEXIS 5025, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walter-n-tobriner-v-john-j-odonnell-jr-cadc-1964.