William H. T. Carney v. Thomas S. Gates, Jr., Secretary of Defense

D.C. Circuit

William H. T. Carney v. Thomas S. Gates, Jr., Secretary of Defense

288 F.2d 161, 109 U.S. App. D.C. 377, 1961 U.S. App. LEXIS 5175

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedMarch 2, 1961

Docket15578

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 288 F.2d 161 (William H. T. Carney v. Thomas S. Gates, Jr., Secretary of Defense) 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

William H. T. Carney v. Thomas S. Gates, Jr., Secretary of Defense, 288 F.2d 161, 109 U.S. App. D.C. 377, 1961 U.S. App. LEXIS 5175 (D.C. Cir. 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Challenging his removal from service as a non-veteran civilian employee of the Department of the Army, appellant sued for a declaratory judgment in the District Court. The appellees moved for summary judgment and, in the alternative, for judgment on the pleadings on grounds of laches. The court granted the motion for summary judgment and dismissed the complaint. We affirm the dismissal on the ground that the suit is barred by laches. United States ex rel. Arant v. Lane, 1919, 249 U.S. 367, 39 S.Ct. 293, 63 L.Ed. 650; Drown v. Higley, 1957, 100 U.S.App.D.C. 326, 244 F.2d 774; Wunderle v. Kimball, 1952, 91 U.S.App.D.C. 394, 201 F.2d 707.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Challenging his removal from service as a non-veteran civilian employee of the Department of the Army, appellant sued for a declaratory judgment in the District Court. The appellees moved for summary judgment and, in the alternative, for judgment on the pleadings on grounds of laches. The court granted the motion for summary judgment and dismissed the complaint. We affirm the dismissal on the ground that the suit is barred by laches. United States ex rel. Arant v. Lane, 1919, 249 U.S. 367, 39 S.Ct. 293, 63 L.Ed. 650; Drown v. Higley, 1957, 100 U.S.App.D.C. 326, 244 F.2d 774; Wunderle v. Kimball, 1952, 91 U.S.App.D.C. 394, 201 F.2d 707.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

288 F.2d 161, 109 U.S. App. D.C. 377, 1961 U.S. App. LEXIS 5175, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/william-h-t-carney-v-thomas-s-gates-jr-secretary-of-defense-cadc-1961.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack