Notes of Decisions
King v. United States, 81 Fed. Cl. 766 (Fed. Cl. 2008).
· cites it 21× “Because the court concludes that 28 U.S.C. § 540C is money-mandating and that the court has jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ claim, defendant’s Motion is DENIED.”
King v. United States, 84 Fed. Cl. 120 (Fed. Cl. 2008).
· cites it 14× “The complaint in this action, filed on August 2, 2007, claims that plaintiffs, FBI police officers working during at least one pay period after January 1, 2003, were denied pay and benefits mandated by 28 U.S.C. § 540C. Complaint (Compl.) 1. Plaintiffs claim that pursuant to the…”
King v. United States, 130 Fed. Cl. 476 (Fed. Cl. 2017).
· cites it 16× “§ 5596 ; Class Action; FBI Police; 28 U.S.C. § 540C; Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment; RCFC 56 OPINION FIRESTONE, Senior Judge.”
King v. United States, 84 Fed. Cl. 348 (Fed. Cl. 2008).
· cites it 2× “The complaint in this action, filed on August 2, 2007, claims that plaintiffs, FBI police officers working during at least one pay period after January 1, 2003, were denied pay and benefits mandated by 28 U.S.C. § 540C. Complaint (Compl.) 1. Plaintiffs claim that, pursuant to…”
United States v. Jones, 207 F. Supp. 3d 576 (E.D.N.C. 2016).
“” 28 U.S.C. § 540C(b)(4)(ii). This authority necessarily includes the initiation of an investigation based upon the evidence of criminal conduct.”
King v. United States, 93 Fed. Cl. 718 (Fed. Cl. 2010).
“1 The complaint in this action, filed on August 2, 2007, claims that plaintiffs, FBI police officers working during at least one pay period after January 1, 2003, were denied pay and benefits mandated by 28 U.S.C. § 540C. Complaint (Compl.) 1, 3.”
— 28 U.S.C. § 540C(5)(A) — 1 case
King v. United States, 81 Fed. Cl. 766 (Fed. Cl. 2008).
“Because the court concludes that 28 U.S.C. § 540C is money-mandating and that the court has jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ claim, defendant’s Motion is DENIED.”
— 28 U.S.C. § 540C(b) — 1 case
King v. United States, 81 Fed. Cl. 766 (Fed. Cl. 2008).
“Because the court concludes that 28 U.S.C. § 540C is money-mandating and that the court has jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ claim, defendant’s Motion is DENIED.”
— 28 U.S.C. § 540C(b)(1) — 1 case
King v. United States, 130 Fed. Cl. 476 (Fed. Cl. 2017).
“§ 5596 ; Class Action; FBI Police; 28 U.S.C. § 540C; Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment; RCFC 56 OPINION FIRESTONE, Senior Judge.”
— 28 U.S.C. § 540C(b)(4) — 1 case
King v. United States, 130 Fed. Cl. 476 (Fed. Cl. 2017).
“§ 5596 ; Class Action; FBI Police; 28 U.S.C. § 540C; Cross-Motions for Summary Judgment; RCFC 56 OPINION FIRESTONE, Senior Judge.”
— 28 U.S.C. § 540C(b)(4)(ii) — 1 case
United States v. Jones, 207 F. Supp. 3d 576 (E.D.N.C. 2016).
“” 28 U.S.C. § 540C(b)(4)(ii). This authority necessarily includes the initiation of an investigation based upon the evidence of criminal conduct.”
— 28 U.S.C. § 540C(b)(5) — 1 case
King v. United States, 81 Fed. Cl. 766 (Fed. Cl. 2008).
“Because the court concludes that 28 U.S.C. § 540C is money-mandating and that the court has jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ claim, defendant’s Motion is DENIED.”
— 28 U.S.C. § 540C(b)(5)(A) — 1 case
King v. United States, 84 Fed. Cl. 120 (Fed. Cl. 2008).
“The complaint in this action, filed on August 2, 2007, claims that plaintiffs, FBI police officers working during at least one pay period after January 1, 2003, were denied pay and benefits mandated by 28 U.S.C. § 540C. Complaint (Compl.) 1. Plaintiffs claim that pursuant to the…”
— 28 U.S.C. § 540C(b)(5)(B) — 1 case
King v. United States, 84 Fed. Cl. 120 (Fed. Cl. 2008).
“The complaint in this action, filed on August 2, 2007, claims that plaintiffs, FBI police officers working during at least one pay period after January 1, 2003, were denied pay and benefits mandated by 28 U.S.C. § 540C. Complaint (Compl.) 1. Plaintiffs claim that pursuant to the…”
— 28 U.S.C. § 540C(b)(l) — 2 cases
King v. United States, 84 Fed. Cl. 120 (Fed. Cl. 2008).
“The complaint in this action, filed on August 2, 2007, claims that plaintiffs, FBI police officers working during at least one pay period after January 1, 2003, were denied pay and benefits mandated by 28 U.S.C. § 540C. Complaint (Compl.) 1. Plaintiffs claim that pursuant to the…”
King v. United States, 81 Fed. Cl. 766 (Fed. Cl. 2008).
“Because the court concludes that 28 U.S.C. § 540C is money-mandating and that the court has jurisdiction over plaintiffs’ claim, defendant’s Motion is DENIED.”
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.