B-138113, AUG. 18, 1960
Highlights
KING AND KING: REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JULY 15. THOSE MATTERS ARE NOT MATERIAL IN A MONDEAU TYPE CASE. SINCE IT APPEARS THAT NO FURTHER ACTION WILL BE TAKEN BY THE GOVERNMENT IN A CASE OF THIS TYPE. HEALY'S CLAIM WILL BE SETTLED ON THE BASIS OF THE HOLDING IN THE MONDEAU CASE. IS NOT BARRED BY THE DOCTRINE OF RES JUDICATA FOR THE PERIOD FEBRUARY 26. 1948 (HIS CLAIM WAS RECEIVED HERE ON FEBRUARY 26. HEALY'S CLAIM IS BEING REFERRED TO OUR CLAIMS DIVISION FOR RECOMPUTATION OF HIS RETIRED PAY FOR THE PERIOD STATED ABOVE. SETTLEMENT WILL BE STATED IN HIS FAVOR FOR THE AMOUNT FOUND DUE.
B-138113, AUG. 18, 1960
TO LAW OFFICES, KING AND KING:
REFERENCE IS MADE TO YOUR LETTER OF JULY 15, 1960, REQUESTING FURTHER CONSIDERATION OF THE CLAIM OF MR. WILLIAM L. HEALY FOR ADDITIONAL RETIRED PAY COVERING THE PERIOD FROM FEBRUARY 25, 1948, THROUGH FEBRUARY 3, 1953, PREDICATED UPON THE DECISION OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF CLAIMS IN THE CASE OF AMSDEN, ET AL. (FRANK M. MONDEAU, PLAINTIFF NO. 19) V. UNITED STATES, CT.CL. NO. 134-54, DECIDED JULY 15, 1959, AND THE SUBSEQUENT DECISION IN THE SAME CASE INVOLVING JAMES B. MCCARTHY, PLAINTIFF NO. 17, DECIDED JUNE 8, 1960.
WHILE THE DECISION IN THE MCCARTHY CASE HAS LEFT UNDECIDED CERTAIN MATTERS CONCERNING THE DOCTRINE OF RES JUDICATA, THOSE MATTERS ARE NOT MATERIAL IN A MONDEAU TYPE CASE. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, AND SINCE IT APPEARS THAT NO FURTHER ACTION WILL BE TAKEN BY THE GOVERNMENT IN A CASE OF THIS TYPE, MR. HEALY'S CLAIM WILL BE SETTLED ON THE BASIS OF THE HOLDING IN THE MONDEAU CASE. UNDER THAT HOLDING, MR. HEALY, LIKE MONDEAU, IS NOT BARRED BY THE DOCTRINE OF RES JUDICATA FOR THE PERIOD FEBRUARY 26, 1948 (HIS CLAIM WAS RECEIVED HERE ON FEBRUARY 26, 1958), THROUGH FEBRUARY 3, 1953.
ACCORDINGLY, MR. HEALY'S CLAIM IS BEING REFERRED TO OUR CLAIMS DIVISION FOR RECOMPUTATION OF HIS RETIRED PAY FOR THE PERIOD STATED ABOVE. SETTLEMENT WILL BE STATED IN HIS FAVOR FOR THE AMOUNT FOUND DUE, IF OTHERWISE CORRECT.