Case ID: us-ct-cl_20/html/0534-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

EMMA V. BROWN, ADMINISTRATRIX, v. THE UNITED STATES.
    (18 C. Cls. R., 537; 113 U. S. R., 568.)
    
      On the claimant’s Appeal.
    
    A boatswain in the Navy, in October, 1872, placed on the retired list under the del August 3, 1861 (eh. 42, $ 23, 12 Stat. L., 291; Rev. Stat., 1448-1.455), is not allowed longevity pay. His administratrix claims that he was never legally retired, arid was entitled to the salary of an officer on the active list amt to longevity increase.
    The court below decides—
    (1.) The Act August 3, 1861 (clt. 42, § 23, 12 Stat. L., 291; Rev. Stat., 1448-1455), apjdies to warrant officers, and they may be retired. The President’s act in retiring a boatswain in 1872 was legal and valid.
    (2.) Officers of the Navy on the retired list are not entitled to longevitypay under the provisions of Rev. Stat., § 1588, for the time their names are borne on said list.
   The judgment of the court below is affirmed on the same grounds.

Mr. Justice Woods delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court, March 2, 1885.