B-140734, MAR. 11, 1960

B-140734, MAR. 11, 1960

TO LAW OFFICES, KING AND KING:

REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF DECEMBER 22, 1959, REQUESTING REVIEW OF OUR SETTLEMENT OF NOVEMBER 27, 1959, WHICH DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF MR. WILLIAM HARRISON LASLEY FOR ADDITIONAL RETIRED PAY FROM OCTOBER 1, 1949, TO DATE OF SETTLEMENT. MR. LASLEY'S CLAIM WAS PRESENTED ON THE BASIS OF SELIGA V. UNITED STATES, 137 C.CLS. 710. THE DISALLOWANCE WAS MADE ON THE GROUND THAT JUDGMENT ENTERED IN MR. LASLEY'S FAVOR ON DECEMBER 1, 1953, AND PAID IN MARCH 1954 IN THE CASE OF ELICSO ABAYA, ET AL. V. UNITED STATES, C.CLS.NO. 130-53, A SUIT FOR INCREASED RETIRED PAY, BARRED CONSIDERATION OF HIS CLAIM UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF 28 U.S.C. 2517 AND THE DOCTRINE OF RES JUDICATA.

MR. LASLEY'S CASE APPEARS TO BE SIMILAR TO THE CASES OF ROMAN DEL ROSARIO AND FREDERICO DENOFRA DISCUSSED IN OUR DECISION OF TODAY TO YOU, B-98978, B-137626.

CONCERNING YOUR CONTENTION THAT MR. LASLEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED INCREASED RETIRED PAY FOR THE PERIOD COMMENCING DECEMBER 2, 1953, THE DAY AFTER ENTRY OF JUDGMENT IN THE ABAYA CASE, IT APPEARS THAT HIS SIMILAR CLAIM NOW PENDING BEFORE THE COURT OF CLAIMS IN THE CASE OF CAMPBELL, ET AL. V. UNITED STATES, C.CLS.NO. 371-59 (5), COVERS THE PERIOD COMMENCING AUGUST 1, 1953. WHILE WE HAVE BEEN INFORMED THAT YOU HAVE FILED A MOTION TO DISMISS THAT SUIT, TO BE HELD IN ESCROW PENDING SATISFACTORY SETTLEMENT OF HIS CLAIM BY THIS OFFICE, IT IS ASSUMED THAT YOU WOULD NOT REGARD PAYMENT FOR THE PERIOD ON AND AFTER DECEMBER 2, 1953, AS A SATISFACTORY SETTLEMENT OF THE CLAIM BEFORE THE COURT. HENCE, SETTLEMENT ON THAT BASIS WOULD NOT AUTHORIZE DISMISSAL OF THE COURT ACTION.

FOR THE REASONS STATED ABOVE AND IN B-98978, B-137626, OF TODAY, NO FURTHER ACTION WILL BE TAKEN ON MR. LASLEY'S CLAIM AT THE PRESENT TIME.