B-119969, MAR 3, 1955
Highlights
GRESHAM: RECEIPT IS ACKNOWLEDGED OF YOUR LETTER OF FEBRUARY 10. IN WHICH WE EXPLAINED WHY YOU WERE REQUIRED TO TAKE COURT LEAVE INSTEAD OF ANNUAL LEAVE FOR THE PERIOD OF YOUR JURY SERVICE IN THE TUSCALOOSA COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT WHILE EMPLOYED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY. YOU DISPUTE OUR HOLDING THAT IT WAS MANDATORY UNDER THE STATUTE THAT THE TIME SERVED ON JURY DUTY BE CHARGED TO COURT LEAVE. CONTEND THAT HAD YOU BEEN PERMITTED TO TAKE ANNUAL LEAVE FOR THAT PERIOD YOU COULD HAVE RETAINED THE FEES PAID YOU BY THE STATE INSTEAD OF TURNING THEM IN TO THE OFFICE WHERE YOU WERE EMPLOYED. IT IS NOT APPARENT HOW THE LANGUAGE OF THE ABOVE-QUOTED STATUTE COULD HAVE BEEN EXPRESSED IN MORE MANDATORY TERMS THAN IT IS.
B-119969, MAR 3, 1955
PRECIS-UNAVAILABLE
MR. RICHARD A. GRESHAM:
RECEIPT IS ACKNOWLEDGED OF YOUR LETTER OF FEBRUARY 10, 1955, CONCERNING OUR LETTER OF FEBRUARY 3, 1955, TO HONORABLE ARMISTEAD I. SELDEN, JR., HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, IN WHICH WE EXPLAINED WHY YOU WERE REQUIRED TO TAKE COURT LEAVE INSTEAD OF ANNUAL LEAVE FOR THE PERIOD OF YOUR JURY SERVICE IN THE TUSCALOOSA COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT WHILE EMPLOYED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, DISTRICT ENGINEER'S OFFICE, MOBILE, ALABAMA. YOU DISPUTE OUR HOLDING THAT IT WAS MANDATORY UNDER THE STATUTE THAT THE TIME SERVED ON JURY DUTY BE CHARGED TO COURT LEAVE, AND CONTEND THAT HAD YOU BEEN PERMITTED TO TAKE ANNUAL LEAVE FOR THAT PERIOD YOU COULD HAVE RETAINED THE FEES PAID YOU BY THE STATE INSTEAD OF TURNING THEM IN TO THE OFFICE WHERE YOU WERE EMPLOYED.
THE LETTER OF JANUARY 3, 1955, TO REPRESENTATIVE SELDEN AND THE ONE DATED MAY 20, 1954, TO YOU QUOTED AND EXPLAINED THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT OF JUNE 29, 1940, 54 STAT. 689. FOR PURPOSE OF EMPHASIS WE DEEM IT APPROPRIATE TO AGAIN QUOTE THAT STATUTE, VIZ.:
"THAT THE COMPENSATION OF ANY EMPLOYEE OF THE UNITED STATES OR OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WHO MAY BE CALLED UPON FOR JURY SERVICE IN ANY STATE COURT OR COURT OF THE UNITED STATES SHALL NOT BE DIMINISHED DURING THE TERM OF SUCH JURY SERVICE BY REASON OF SUCH ABSENCE, EXCEPT AS PROVIDED IN SECTION 3, NOR SHALL SUCH PERIOD OF SERVICE BE DEDUCTED FROM THE TIME ALLOWED FOR ANY LEAVE OF ABSENCE AUTHORIZED BY LAW.
"SEC. 2. ANY EMPLOYEE SPECIFIED IN SECTION 1 WHO MAY BE CALLED UPON FOR JURY SERVICE IN ANY COURT OF THE UNITED STATES SHALL NOT RECEIVE ANY COMPENSATION FOR SERVICE.
"SEC. 3. THERE SHALL BE CREDITED AGAINST THE AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION PAYABLE BY THE UNITED STATES TO ANY EMPLOYEE SPECIFIED IN SECTION 1 FOR SUCH PERIOD AS SUCH EMPLOYEE MAY BE ABSENT ON ACCOUNT OF JURY SERVICE IN THE COURT OF ANY STATE ANY AMOUNTS WHICH SUCH EMPLOYEE MAY RECEIVE FROM SUCH STATE ON ACCOUNT OF SUCH JURY SERVICE."
IT IS NOT APPARENT HOW THE LANGUAGE OF THE ABOVE-QUOTED STATUTE COULD HAVE BEEN EXPRESSED IN MORE MANDATORY TERMS THAN IT IS. IT STATES SPECIFICALLY THAT THE COMPENSATION OF ANY EMPLOYEE CALLED FOR JURY DUTY "SHALL NOT BE DIMINISHED *** NOR SHALL SUCH PERIOD OF SERVICE BE DEDUCTED FROM THE TIME ALLOWED FOR ANY LEAVE OF ABSENCE AUTHORIZED BY LAW." (UNDERSCORING SUPPLIED.) FURTHERMORE, SECTION 3, WITHOUT MENTIONING WHETHER THE JURY SERVICE BE CHARGED TO COURT OR ANNUAL LEAVE, MAKES IT MANDATORY THAT THE AMOUNTS RECEIVED FROM SUCH STATE BE CREDITED AGAINST THE AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION PAYABLE BY THE UNITED STATES; THAT IS TO SAY, IF YOU HAD NOT TURNED IN THE FEES RECEIVED FROM THE STATE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN NECESSARY TO REDUCE YOUR COMPENSATION BY THAT AMOUNT. CLEARLY, YOU LOST NOTHING OF MONETARY VALUE BY BEING CHARGED WITH COURT LEAVE INSTEAD OF ANNUAL LEAVE FOR THE PERIOD OF YOUR JURY DUTY.