United States v. Stahl,
151 U.S. 366 (1894)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

United States v. Stahl, 151 U.S. 366 (1894)

United States v. Stahl

No. 886

Submitted January 8, 1894

Decided January 22, 1894

151 U.S. 366


United States v. Alger, ante, 151 U. S. 362, followed.

In a suit in the Court of Claims for longevity pay, alleged by the claimant and denied by the United States to be due him, "after deducting all just credits and offsets," a sum previously paid him for longevity pay to which he was not entitled may be deducted from the sum found to be due him.

This was a claim for $1,000, alleged to be due for longevity pay as an assistant engineer in the Navy from June 10, 1882, to August 10, 1887. The petitioner alleged that he was entitled to this amount, "after deducting all just credits and offsets." The answer was a general traverse.

The findings of fact by the Court of Claims were as follows:

"Claimant entered the Naval Academy September 14, 1876, graduated June 10, 1880, and was commissioned assistant engineer June 10, 1882. On August 10, 1887, he resigned his commission as assistant engineer. On August 11, 1887, he was duly appointed and commissioned an assistant naval constructor. Claimant has never received any credit upon his commission as assistant engineer for his service in the navy from his entry into the Naval Academy September 14, 1876, till the date of his said commission, June 10, 1882. On December 30, 1888, claimant was given credit for his prior service at the naval academy, and as assistant engineer, upon the commission then held by him of assistant naval constructor. The amount due claimant is $1,000 as unpaid longevity pay. "

Page 151 U. S. 367

Upon these facts, the Court of Claims decided as a conclusion of law that the claimant was entitled to recover the sum claimed, and gave judgment accordingly. The United States appealed to this Court.

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law 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.