28 U.S.C. § 374
Residence of retired judges; official station
Retired judges of the United States are not subject to restrictions as to residence. The place where a retired judge maintains the actual abode in which he customarily lives shall be deemed to be his official station for the purposes of section 456 of this title. The place where a judge or magistrate judge recalled under section 155, 375, 636, or 797 of this title maintains the actual abode in which the judge or magistrate judge customarily lives shall be deemed to be the official station of such judge or magistrate judge for purposes of section 604(a)(7) of this title.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases, 1940–1994 · leading case: Putnam v. United States, 32 F.3d 911 (5th Cir. 1994).
Putnam v. United States, 32 F.3d 911 (5th Cir. 1994). “Upon his retirement, Judge Putnam’s place of residence, or Abbeville, became his official duty station pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 374 . During 1985 and 1986, Judge Putnam was recalled to serve in the Western, Eastern, and Middle Districts of Louisiana.”
Putnam v. United States, 826 F. Supp. 988 (W.D. La. 1993). “As a consequence, Judge Putnam’s residence in Abbeville became his statutorily designated official duty station pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 374 . During the years 1985 and 1986, a shortage of active judges prompted the Chief Judge of the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit to…”
Sweeney v. Dist. of Columbia, 113 F.2d 25 (D.C. Cir. 1940). “(1934) § 374, 28 U.S.C.A. § 374 . Cf. also the state constitutional provisions referred to in 37 A.”
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.