Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
USA Constitution Annotated
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Online Case Law
Cornell LII
FastCase $
Lexis $
LexisOne
Loislaw $
USSCPlus.com $
VersusLaw $
Link to the Case Preview: http://supreme.justia.com/us/96/232/
Link to the Full Text of Case: http://supreme.justia.com/us/96/232/case.html
U.S. Supreme Court
United States v. Morrison, 96 U.S. 232 (1877)
United States v. Morrison
96 U.S. 232
Syllabus
1. A quartermaster of a regiment of cavalry, who also serves as acting assistant commissary, is entitled to the additional compensation of $100 per annum provided for by sec. 1261 of the Revised Statutes.
2. As such quartermaster receives no compensation for staff service separate from that of rank, he does not, within the meaning of the army regulations, receive pay for his staff appointment.
Morrison, the appellee, a lieutenant in the tenth regiment of cavalry, was appointed regimental quartermaster, and his appointment approved June 30, 1875. On the same day, Hunt, a second lieutenant in the regiment, was promoted to be first lieutenant in the place of Morrison, "appointed regimental quartermaster." On the 22d October, 1875, Morrison, "in addition to his other duties," was "assigned to duty as assistant commissary of post," and by virtue of that appointment served as acting assistant commissary from Nov. 1, 1875, to and including, Feb. 28, 1877. He has been paid in full as quartermaster, but nothing in addition as acting assistant commissary. This action is brought to recover at the rate of $100 a year for the extra service. The court below gave judgment in his favor for $133.33, whereupon the United States appealed here.
