Benedict v. United StatesAnnotate this Case
176 U.S. 357 (1900)
U.S. Supreme Court
Benedict v. United States, 176 U.S. 357 (1900)
Benedict v. United States
Argued January 15, 1900
Decided February 26, 1900
176 U.S. 357
Extra compensation received by a district judge for holding court outside of his own district is no part of his official salary or recoverable as such under the provisions of the retiring act.
This was a petition by the late District Judge for the Eastern District of New York for his retiring salary under Rev.Stat. § 714 at the rate of $6,800 per annum, which the petition avers was the salary which was by law payable to him during the year previous to his resignation. The petitioner acknowledges the payment of $5,000 and claims a residue of $1,800, to which he avers himself to be justly entitled.
Upon hearing the case and upon the consent of parties, the Court of Claims found the following facts:
"First. The petitioner, Charles L. Benedict, is a citizen of the United States, of lawful age, and resides at Dongan Hills, Staten Island, in the City of New York and State of New York."
"Second. In the month of April, 1865, the petitioner was duly appointed by the President of the United States Judge of the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of New York."
"Third. The petitioner duly entered on the duties of his office, and duly performed the same until the year 1897, during which, and on or about the 20th of July, 1897, he resigned his office, having then held his commission as judge of said court for more than ten years, and having attained the age of seventy and upward."
"Fourth. Since the passage of the Act of February 7, 1873, the petitioner has held, under the provisions of that act and the Revised Statutes, to-wit, sections 613 and 658 of the Revised Statutes, the six terms of the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York, referred
to in said statutes, in every year, and has received for holding each of said terms the sum of $300, the same being paid to him by the United States Marshal for the Southern District of New York pursuant to sections 613 and 597, Revised Statutes."
"Fifth. That the same was paid upon a voucher in substance as follows:"
"The total amount thus paid annually to the plaintiff was $1,800."
"Sixty. That such payments to the petitioner by the marshal were from time to time allowed in the marshal's accounts and paid to him out of the appropriations for defraying the expenses of the courts of the United States."
"Seventh. During the year previous to the petitioner's resignation, he received the said $1,800 for that year, in accordance with the provisions of sections 613, 597, and 658, Revised Statutes, as above set forth, and also the salary of $5,000 payable to him as provided by the Act of Congress of February 24, 1891, appropriation to pay the salaries of district judges of the United States."
"Eighth. During the year since his resignation, petitioner has only received as salary the sum of $5,000, which sum has been received by him without prejudice to the claim which he makes in this proceeding."
"Ninth. The petitioner presented to the auditor of the state and other departments a bill for the amount of his salary claimed by him herein to be remaining due and unpaid, and made claim on the auditor for the payment of said bill, but the auditor refused to audit or approve the said bill, and no part of the said $1,800 has been paid to him."
The petition was dismissed (34 Ct.Cl. 388), and petitioner appealed to this Court.
Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.