Case ID: us-ct-cl_13/html/0522-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Miller", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

MEIGS’S CASE.
    (Not reported in C. Cls. R.;
    95 U. S. R., 748.)
    Return J. Meigs and Others, appellees v. The United States, appellants.
    
      On the defendants' Appeal.
    
    
      The Twenty-per cent. Resolution, 28thFebruary, 1867 (14 Stat. L.. 569), gives an increase of pay to employés of the Executive Departments. The deputy cleric, crier, and messenger of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia claim that the resolution extends to them.
    
    The court below holds in Huntington’s Case (8 C. Cls. R., 495) that the Twenty per cent. Resolution, 1867 (14 Stat L., 569) does not extend to the clerks and employés of the judiciary, and, accordingly, in this case, that the claimants are not entitled to the benefits of the resolution. But the claimants having no right of appeal, judgment proforma,, for the purposes of an appeal, is rendered in their favor. The defendants appeal.
    The judgment pro/oma of the court below is reversed. The Supreme Court holds with the Court of Claims in Huntington’s Case (8. C. Cls. R., 495), that the clerks and employés of a court are not entitled to the benefits of the Twenty per cent. Resolution, 1867 (14 Stat. L., 569).
   Mr. Justice Miller

delivered tbe opinion of tbe Supreme Court, January 21, 1878.