10 U.S.C. § 1207
Disability from intentional misconduct or willful neglect: separation
Each member of the armed forces who incurs a physical disability that, in the determination of the Secretary concerned, makes him unfit to perform the duties of his office, grade, rank, or rating, and that resulted from his intentional misconduct or willful neglect or was incurred during a period of unauthorized absence, shall be separated from his armed force without entitlement to any benefits under this chapter.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1981–2024 · leading case: Chayra v. United States, 23 Cl. Ct. 172 (Ct. Cl. 1991).
Chayra v. United States, 23 Cl. Ct. 172 (Ct. Cl. 1991). “10 U.S.C. § 1207 (1988). Four days after the accident, on May 27, 1983, the Department of the Navy (the “Navy”) opened an investigation into the cause of plaintiff’s mishap.”
McCray v. United States, 3 Cl. Ct. 253 (Ct. Cl. 1983). “However, the majority of the RPEB also concluded that since his disabilities were incurred during a period of unauthorized absence, he was ineligible for physical disability retirement or physical disability severance benefits under the provisions of 10 U.S.C. § 1207 (1976). 1…”
Sawyer v. United States, 18 Cl. Ct. 860 (Ct. Cl. 1989). “10 U.S.C. § 1207 provides: Each member of the armed forces who incurs a physical disability that, in the determination of the Secretary concerned, makes him unfit to perform the *862 duties of his office, grade, rank, or rating, and that resulted from his intentional misconduct…”
Renicker v. United States, 17 Cl. Ct. 611 (Ct. Cl. 1989). “10 U.S.C. § 1207 (1956). In his application to the ABCMR, plaintiff contested his line of duty determination.”
Burns v. United States, 20 Cl. Ct. 758 (Ct. Cl. 1990). “On January 5, 1972, the PEB recommended that plaintiff be separated from the Army, pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 1207 (1956), without disability or retirement benefits.”
Yount v. United States, 23 Cl. Ct. 372 (Ct. Cl. 1991). “See also 10 U.S.C. § 1207 (requiring Secretary to deny disability benefits if injury resulted from intentional misconduct).”
Thompson v. Austin (D. Maryland 2024). “The VA conducts a Compensation and Pension (“C&P”) examination and determines a disability rating separate from that determined under 2 The PEB may recommend the following dispositions: (1) return to duty; (2) permanent disability retirement; (3) placement on the temporary…”
Grant v. United States (Fed. Cl. 2024). “10 U.S.C. § 1207 (a) (establishing servicemembers that incur a physical disability from their own intentional misconduct, willful neglect, or incurred during a .”
Young, 226 Ct. Cl. 626 (Ct. Cl. 1981). “See, 10 U.S.C. § 1207 . With respect to his superficiality argument plaintiff cites the PEB’s error in characterizing his discharge as being a result of unfitness for duty rather than promotion passover.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.