White v. United States

97 F. Supp. 698, 121 Ct. Cl. 1, 1951 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 119
CourtUnited States Court of Claims
DecidedJune 5, 1951
DocketNo. 48989
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 97 F. Supp. 698 (White 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
White v. United States, 97 F. Supp. 698, 121 Ct. Cl. 1, 1951 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 119 (cc 1951).

Opinions

Howell, Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court:

Plaintiff, on January 18,1927, entered into a minority term of enlistment in the United States Navy from which he was honorably discharged on March 10, 1930. He reenlisted in the United States Navy on May 9,1930, and served through successive terms of enlistment until June 30, 1946, when he was transferred to the Fleet Reserve in the rating of Chief Water Tender, which rating he held on the active list immediately prior to his transfer. Although transferred to the Fleet Reserve on June 30, 1946, plaintiff was retained on active duty until December 22, 1946, when he was released to an inactive status.

At the time of his transfer to the Fleet Reserve on June 30, 1946, plaintiff was credited with 20 years’ active service by reason of the credit for a full four years’ active service given to him for his original minority enlistment in the United States Navy, although his actual service amounted to but 19 years, 2 months, and 29 days.

On December 22, 1946, when plaintiff was released to an inactive status, he had served 19 years, 8 months, and 23 days actual active service in the United States Navy.

After his release from active duty, plaintiff elected and requested that he be paid retainer pay computed on the basis of two and one-lialf per centum of the total pay he received at the time of his release to an inactive status, multiplied by the 20 years’ active service with which he was credited, but instead he was paid only retainer pay computed on the basis of one-half of the base pay he was entitled to receive while serving on active duty.

This action by plaintiff is to recover the difference between retainer pay computed at the rate of two and one-half per centum of the base and longevity pay he was receiving at the date of his transfer to the Fleet Reserve multiplied by the [4]*4number of years of active service he had completed at the time of his transfer and retainer pay computed on the basis of one-half of his base pay, on which basis he has been paid from December 22, 1946, to the date of judgment.

Sections 202 and 204 of the Naval Reserve Act of 1938, 52 Stat. 1175, 1178, provide in part as follows:

Sec. 202. For all purposes of this Act a complete enlistment during minority shall be counted as four years' service [italics added] and any enlistment terminated within three months prior to the expiration of the term of such enlistment shall be counted as the full term of service [italics added] for which enlisted: Provided, That all transfers from the Regular Navy to the Fleet Naval Reserve or to the Fleet Reserve, and all transfers of members of the Fleet Naval Reserve or the Fleet Reserve to the retired list of the Regular Navy, heretofore or hereafter made by the Secretary of the Navy, shall be conclusive for all purposes, and all members so transferred shall, from the date of transfer, be entitled to pay and allowances, in accordance with their ranks or ratings and length of service as determined by the Secretary of the Navy :■ * * *.
Sec. 204. Men serving in the Regular Navy on the date of the passage of this Act, who first enlisted in the Navy after July 1,1925, or who reenlisted therein after July 1, 1925, having been out of the Regular Navy for more than three months, and men who first enlist in the Regular Navy after the passage of this Act, may upon their own request be transferred to the Fleet Reserve upon the completion of at least twenty years’ naval service: [italics added] * * *.

Section 202 of the Naval Reserve Act, supra, provides in plain language that a complete enlistment during minority shall be counted as four years’ “service.” The issue in this case arises as a result of the language found in Section 204 of the same Act as amended by the Act of August 10, 1946, supra, wherein it is provided that members of the Navy can be transferred to the Fleet Reserve after the completion of at least 19 years and 6 months’ “active Federal service.”

Plaintiff actually served 3 years, 1 month, and 23 days in a minority enlistment and contends that he is entitled to add the 10 months and 7 days of “constructive service,” with which he was credited by reason of his minority enlistment to his [5]*519 years, 2 months, and 29 days of actual Federal service so that his retainer pay can be computed in accordance with Section 204 of the Naval Reserve Act.

Defendant bases its defense upon the proposition that while “constructive service” during a minority enlistment can be counted as “active” service for purposes of retirement into the Fleet Reserve under Section 202, such service cannot be counted as “active Federal service” for purposes of computing retirement pay under Section 204 of the Act, as amended.

Section 2 of the Act of August 10,1946, 60- Stat. 993, provides as follows:

Sec. 2. Section 204 of the Naval Reserve Act of 1938 (52 Stat. 1179) is hereby amended to read as follows:
“Sec. 204. Members of the Navy who first enlisted in the Navy after July 1, 1925, or who reenlisted therein after July 1,1925, having been out of the Regular Navy for more than three months, may upon their own request be transferred to the Fleet Reserve upon the completion of at least twenty years’ active Federal service. After such transfer; except when on active duty, they shall be paid at the annual, rate of 2y% per centum of the annual base and longevity pay they áre receiving at the time of transfer multiplied by the number of years of active Federal service: Provided, That the pay authorized in this section shall be increased 10 per centum for all men who may be credited with extraordinary heroism in the line of duty: Provided further, That the determination of the Secretary of the Navy as to the definition of extraordinary heroism shall be final and conclusive for all purposes: Provided further, That the pay authorized in this section shall not exceed 75 per centum of the active-duty base and longevity pay they were receiving at the time of transfer: Provided further, That all enlisted men transferred to the Fleet Reserve in accordance with the provisions of this section and of sections 1 and 203 of this Act shall, upon completion of thirty years’ service, be transferred to the retired list of the Regular Navy, with the pay they were then legally entitled to.receive: Provided further, That nothing contained within this section shall be construed to prevent persons who qualify for transfer to the Fleet Reserve under the provisions of section 203 of this Act from being transferred in accordance with the provisions of this section if they so elect: Provided further, That a fractional year' of six [6]*6-months or more shall be considered a full year for purposes of this section and section-203 in computing years of active Federal service and base- and longevity pay: And provided further, That the provisions of this section shall apply to all persons of the class described, herein heretofore or hereafter transferred to the Fleet Reserve, except that no increase in pay or allowances shall be deemed to have accrued prior to the date of the enactment of this amendment. For the purposes of this section, all active service in the Army of the United States, the Navy, the Marine Corps, the Coast Guard, or any component thereof, shall be deemed to be active Federal service.”

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

Related

Finkelstein v. United States
29 Fed. Cl. 611 (Federal Claims, 1993)
Thomas Francis Callahan v. The United States
328 F.2d 350 (Court of Claims, 1964)
Callahan v. United States
328 F.2d 350 (Court of Claims, 1964)
Bailey v. United States
158 Ct. Cl. 387 (Court of Claims, 1962)
Humphrey v. United States
145 F. Supp. 743 (Court of Claims, 1956)
Almour v. Pace, Secretary of the Army
193 F.2d 699 (D.C. Circuit, 1951)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
97 F. Supp. 698, 121 Ct. Cl. 1, 1951 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 119, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/white-v-united-states-cc-1951.