885

for rights of set-off under the circumstances of this case, would be to defeat the purpose of Congress. It would require the assignee to police the assignor's accounting and payment system. It would increase the risk to the assignee, the difficulty of the assignor in financing the performance, and the ultimate cost to the Government. Reversed.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE, MR. JUSTICE BURTON and MR. JUSTICE CLARK dissent.

MR. JUSTICE BLACK and MR. JUSTICE JACKSON took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

JESSE MILLER SINCLAIR, PETITIONER, v. THE UNITED STATES

[No. 256-52]

[124 C. Cls. 182; 345 U. S. 974]

Suit for damages for unjust conviction and imprisonment. Defendant's motion for summary judgment granted and plaintiff's petition dismissed.

Plaintiff's petition for writ of certiorari denied by the Supreme Court June 8, 1953.

there was no specific waiver of § 3466, similar to the waiver of the right of set-off or reduction here claimed, this Court held:

"To have given priority to debts due the United States pursuant to Title II, would have defeated the purpose of Congress. It not only would have prevented the reestablishment of railroad credit among bankers and investors, but it would even have seriously impaired the market value of outstanding railroad securities. It would have deprived the carriers of the credit commonly enjoyed from supplymen and others; would have seriously embarrassed the carriers in their daily operations; and would have made necessary a great enlargement of their working capital. The provision for loans under § 210 would have been frustrated. For, carriers could ill afford voluntarily to contract new debts thereunder which would displace, pro tanto, their existing bonded indebtedness. The entire spirit of the Act makes clear the purpose that the rule leading to such consequences should not be applied." 280 U. S., at 485.

125 C. Cls.

THE UNITED STATES, PETITIONER, v. GORDON C. THOMAS, EDWARD W. RAMSEY, AND JAMES WILLIAM FRAME, RESPONDENTS

[Nos. 50341, 50325 and 50043]

[123 C. Cls. 507; 123 C. Cls. 504; 124 C. Cls. 557; 345 U. S. 994]

Pay and allowances; Army officers retired for service disability. Plaintiffs entitled to recover.

Defendant's petitions for writs of certiorari denied by the Supreme Court June 15, 1953.

INDEX DIGEST

ADMINISTRATIVE CONSIDERATION.
See Suit For Salary I, II, III, IV, V, VI.
ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION.

See Contracts XLI, XLII, XLIII, XLIV.
ADMINISTRATOR, DISCRETION OF.

See Veterans' Administration I, II, III, IV.
AMBIGUITY IN LEASE.

See Contracts XXXVII, XXXVIII, XXXIX.
ANNUITIES COMMUTED.

See Indian Claims Commission, Appeal From, I, II, III, IV, V,
VI, VII.

ASSIGNMENT OF CLAIM.

See Lucas Act VIII, IX, X, XI, XII, XIII, XIV, XV, XVI,
XVII, XVIII.

BAD DEBT DEDUCTION.

See Taxes XVI, XVII.

CAREER COMPENSATION ACT.

See Pay and Allowances IV, V, VI, VII, VIII, IX.
CASUALTY LOSSES.

See Taxes XVIII, XIX, XX, XXI.

CATTLE REQUISITIONED.

See Statute of Limitations VII, VIII, IX, X, XI, XII.
CHARTER AGREEMENT.

See Requisition of Vessel I, II, III, IV, V, VI, VII.
CIVIL AERONAUTICS BOARD.

See Suit For Mail Pay I, II, III.

CIVIL SERVICE EMPLOYEE, SUSPENSION OF.
See Suit For Salary XXII, XXIII, XXIV, XXV.

CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT.

I. Where in a suit by plaintiff, an officer on the retired
list of the Army, receiving retired pay based upon
30 years of military service, under the applicable
statutes, it was held on July 15, 1952 (123 C. Cls.
225), that plaintiff was also entitled to retirement
pay under the Civil Service Retirement Act for the
additional years he served in the civilian establish-
ment and the additional years as a soldier not
counted in the computation of his retired pay; and
where the entry of judgment was suspended; it was

893

125 C. Cls.

CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT—Continued

ordered that judgment for the plaintiff be entered
for $360.22. Prentiss, 67.

United States 39 (1).

II. Plaintiff's annuity must be computed under the law in
effect at the time of his separation on August 31,
1946, which was the Act of January 24, 1942 (56
Stat. 13), Section 5 of which amended Section 7 of
the Act of May 29, 1930 (46 Stat. 468). Under the
provisions of the 1942 Act, computation according
to the report of the Civil Service Commission
produces an annuity of $293.52, effective February
1, 1952, increased to $324 a year effective September
1, 1952. Plaintiff is entitled to recover $360.22,
which will include payments due him up to and
including March 31, 1953. Id.

United States 39 (1).

CONTRACT SETTLEMENT ACT.

I. In a suit under Section 17(a) of the Contract Settle-
ment Act of 1944, where it is alleged by the plaintiffs
that they secured a loan from the Reconstruction
Finance Corporation, all the proceeds of which, to-
gether with additional moneys of their own, were
invested in the purchase of properties containing
graphite ore and in the construction of a mill for the
production of graphite, all at the instance of the
Government, and with the assurance of the Govern-
ment that it would purchase from plaintiffs all the
graphite produced by them; it is held on all the evi-
dence that plaintiffs are not entitled to recover.
Alabama Flake Graphite Co., 635.

II. Where the Government denies that any of its represent-
atives agreed to purchase all or any part of plaintiffs'
graphite production; and where the Government
insists that the purchase of the ore-bearing properties
and the erection of the mill was done on plaintiffs'
own initiative, although with the Government's
encouragement in order to meet wartime needs for
graphite, but without any promise on its part to
purchase plaintiffs' output or any of it; it is held that
the evidence produced by plaintiffs fails to establish,
as required by the Contract Settlement Act, that an
agent of the Government expressly or impliedly
promised to purchase plaintiffs' output or any certain
part of it, and fails to establish that any agent of the

125 C. Cls.

CONTRACT SETTLEMENT ACT-Continued

Government had apparent authority to make such
agreement within the meaning of the Contract Set-
tlement Act, which would entitle the plaintiffs to re-
cover. Id.

III. In the negotiations between plaintiffs' representatives
and the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, in
which representatives of other Government agencies
participated, when the plaintiffs were seeking a loan
from the Reconstruction Finance Corporation for
the construction of a graphite plant, which loan was
finally obtained, there is a total lack of any written
evidence of any agreement on the part of any official
of the Government to take the output of the mill to
be erected. All of the written record in the case and
all of the oral testimony, except that of the plaintiff
Shumate, shows that the extent of the negotiations
between plaintiffs and the agencies and representa-
tives of the Government was to secure funds to en-
able plaintiffs to erect the mill, but there is not dis-
closed any suggestion that the Government bound
itself to take the output of the mill. The Govern-
ment wanted the mill erected so that it could secure
graphite from it, in case graphite was needed, but the
sale of its output to the Government or to any one
else was a risk which the plaintiffs took. Id.
United States

CONTRACT SURGEON.

74.

See Pay and Allowances XII, XIII, XIV, XV, XVI.
CONTRACTING OFFICER.

See Contracts XLV, XLVI, XLVII, XLVIII, XLIX, L, LI, LII,
LIII, LIV, LV, LVI, LVII.

CONTRACTS.

I. In a suit for excess costs which were incurred in con-
nection with the performance of an experimental
contract with the Navy Department, where it is
shown by the evidence that the Government did not
order any of the changes nor any redesigning which
led to the increased costs and where it is shown that
the plaintiff neither asked for nor received permission
from the Government to make the changes; it is held
that the plaintiff is not entitled to recovery under the
terms of the contract. Bristol and Martin, Inc., 4,
United States 70 (2).