B-108800, MAR. 24, 1970
Highlights
IS DENIED. CLAIM BASED ON MERE DENIAL OF RECEIPT OF AMOUNTS CLEARLY SHOWN BY OFFICIAL RECORDS TO HAVE BEEN PAID CURRENTLY. MADE LONG AFTER SERVICE WAS RENDERED AND PAYMENT PRESUMED RECEIVED BY ENTITLED PARTY. IS OF TOO DOUBTFUL LEGALITY TO SUPPORT PAYMENT FROM PUBLIC FUNDS. RULE IS THAT DOUBTFUL CLAIMS SHOULD BE DISALLOWED BY ACCOUNTING OFFICERS AND CLAIMANTS LEFT TO REMEDY IN COURTS. ALIMENTI: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTERS OF NOVEMBER 2. A COPY OF WHICH WAS REMAILED TO YOU ON MAY 7. FOUND THAT YOU WERE ACTUALLY OVERPAID $138.24 AT THE TIME OF YOUR DISCHARGE AND THAT YOU THEREFORE WERE NOT ENTITLED TO THE ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF $85.04 WHICH WAS ALLOWED BY OUR CLAIMS DIVISION SETTLEMENT NO. 2006270.
B-108800, MAR. 24, 1970
CLAIMS--DOUBTFUL--ACCOUNTING OFFICERS RULE--MILITARY MATTERS CLAIM FOR PAY BELIEVED DUE JULY 30, 1946, DATE OF CLAIMANT'S DISCHARGE FROM ARMY, IS DENIED, AS CLAIMANT BEARS BURDEN OF PROOF OF ENTITLEMENT TO AMOUNT CLAIMED, AND CLAIM BASED ON MERE DENIAL OF RECEIPT OF AMOUNTS CLEARLY SHOWN BY OFFICIAL RECORDS TO HAVE BEEN PAID CURRENTLY, MADE LONG AFTER SERVICE WAS RENDERED AND PAYMENT PRESUMED RECEIVED BY ENTITLED PARTY, IS OF TOO DOUBTFUL LEGALITY TO SUPPORT PAYMENT FROM PUBLIC FUNDS. RULE IS THAT DOUBTFUL CLAIMS SHOULD BE DISALLOWED BY ACCOUNTING OFFICERS AND CLAIMANTS LEFT TO REMEDY IN COURTS.
TO MR. FRANK E. ALIMENTI:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTERS OF NOVEMBER 2, 1969, AND JANUARY 4, 1970, CONCERNING YOUR CLAIM FOR PAY AND ALLOWANCES BELIEVED TO BE DUE YOU AS OF JULY 30, 1946, THE DATE OF YOUR DISCHARGE AS PRIVATE, UNITED STATES ARMY.
IN OUR DECISION B-108800, DATED FEBRUARY 4, 1953, A COPY OF WHICH WAS REMAILED TO YOU ON MAY 7, 1969, WE CAREFULLY REVIEWED YOUR PAY ACCOUNT FOR THE PERIOD FROM MARCH 1, 1944, TO JULY 30, 1946, AND FOUND THAT YOU WERE ACTUALLY OVERPAID $138.24 AT THE TIME OF YOUR DISCHARGE AND THAT YOU THEREFORE WERE NOT ENTITLED TO THE ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF $85.04 WHICH WAS ALLOWED BY OUR CLAIMS DIVISION SETTLEMENT NO. 2006270, DATED FEBRUARY 4, 1952. HOWEVER, YOU STILL SEEM TO BELIEVE THAT YOU WERE NOT PAID ALL OF THE PAY AND ALLOWANCES TO WHICH YOU WERE ENTITLED AT THE TIME OF YOUR DISCHARGE.
IN REGARD TO CLAIMS AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS UPON THE CLAIMANT TO SHOW THAT HE IS ENTITLED TO THE AMOUNT CLAIMED. YOUR RECENT LETTERS PROVIDE NO BASIS FOR QUESTIONING THE ACCURACY OF THE OFFICIAL PAY RECORDS WHICH SHOW YOU ACTUALLY WERE PAID MORE THAN THE AMOUNT TO WHICH YOU WERE ENTITLED. A CLAIM BASED ON A MERE DENIAL OF RECEIPT OF AMOUNTS WHICH ARE CLEARLY SHOWN BY OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT RECORDS TO HAVE BEEN PAID CURRENTLY, MADE LONG AFTER THE SERVICE WAS RENDERED AND PAYMENT PRESUMED TO HAVE BEEN RECEIVED BY THE PARTY ENTITLED, IS OF TOO DOUBTFUL LEGALITY TO SUPPORT PAYMENT FROM PUBLIC FUNDS. IT HAS BEEN THE LONG-STANDING RULE OF THE COURTS THAT DOUBTFUL CLAIMS AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE DISALLOWED BY THE ACCOUNTING OFFICERS AND THE CLAIMANTS LEFT TO THEIR REMEDY IN THE COURTS. SEE LONGWILL V. UNITED STATES, 17 CT. CL. 288 (1881), AND CHARLES V. UNITED STATES, 19 CT. CL. 316 (1884).