Williams

197 Ct. Cl. 1070, 1972 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 50, 1972 WL 5150
CourtUnited States Court of Claims
DecidedMarch 31, 1972
DocketNo. 526-71
StatusPublished

This text of 197 Ct. Cl. 1070 (Williams) 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
Williams, 197 Ct. Cl. 1070, 1972 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 50, 1972 WL 5150 (cc 1972).

Opinion

Civilian pay/ resignation; limitation of actions. — Plaintiff resigned from his position as a federal postal clerk on March 15,1943. In October 1960 he was hired as a substitute postal clerk, and was retired from federal service on December 31, 1969. Alleging religious discrimination beginning in 1940 and continuing until his reemployment in 1960, plaintiff claims that his resignation was involuntary. Plaintiff seeks back pay as a postal clerk from the date of his resignation to his reemployment, the difference in his pay after re[1071]*1071employment bad. be been credited with federal service for tbe intervening years and an annuity computed on 43 years service. Defendant contends that plaintiff’s claim is barred by tbe statute of limitations and by lacbes. Tbis case comes before tbe court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Upon consideration thereof, without oral argument, tbe court concludes that plaintiff’s alleged claim is barred by tbe statute of limitations, 28 U.S.C. § 2501 (see Kelly v. United States, ante, at 1068 ; Mathis v. United States, 183 Ct. Cl. 145, 391 F. 2d 938 (1968), rehearing granted on an unrelated issue, 183 Ct. Cl. 150, 394 F. 2d 519 (1968) ; and O'Callahan v. United States, 196 Ct. Cl. 556, 451 F. 2d 1390 (1971); and also that plaintiff bas failed to exhaust his administrative remedies (see Friedman v. United States, 159 Ct. Cl. 1, 8-13, 310 F. 2d 381, 385-88 (1962), cert. denied sub. nom., Lipp v. United States, 373 U.S. 932 (1963)). On March 31, 1972 the court, by order, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed tbe petition.

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

Related

Robert T. Mathis, Sr. v. The United States
391 F.2d 938 (Court of Claims, 1968)
Robert T. Mathis, Sr. v. The United States
394 F.2d 519 (Court of Claims, 1968)
Friedman v. United States
310 F.2d 381 (Court of Claims, 1962)
O'Callahan v. United States
451 F.2d 1390 (Court of Claims, 1971)
Lipp v. United States
373 U.S. 932 (Supreme Court, 1963)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
197 Ct. Cl. 1070, 1972 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 50, 1972 WL 5150, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-cc-1972.