37 U.S.C. § 313
Repealed. Pub. L. 96–513, title IV, § 414(a), Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 2906]
[repealed]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19
cases, 1952–2014 · leading case: Adair v. United States, 227 Ct. Cl. 345 (Ct. Cl. 1981).
Adair v. United States, 227 Ct. Cl. 345 (Ct. Cl. 1981). “KUNZIG, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court: In these five consolidated pay cases, 1 plaintiffs are some 220 Public Health Service (PHS) physicians who claim *346 entitlement to so-called "variable incentive pay” (VIP) under 37 U.S.C. §313 (1976). The Government, relying…”
Victoria M. Voge v. United States, 844 F.2d 776 (Fed. Cir. 1988). “similar to the authority provided by [ 37 U.S.C. § 313 (b) ].” H.R.Rep. No. 96-904, 96th Cong.”
Donald D. Huston v. The United States, 956 F.2d 259 (Fed. Cir. 1992). “1981), which held that 37 U.S.C. § 313 (1976) was not pay mandating.”
William Wood Turner, Jr. v. Casper W. Weinberger, Sec'y of Def., 728 F.2d 751 (5th Cir. 1984). “WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge: This is a military pay rights case brought by a class of approximately 8,340 military and Public Health Service (“PHS”) physicians (“Turner Class”) who claim entitlement to incentive pay pursuant to former 37 U.S.C. § 313 (1976). They seek a writ of…”
Roberts v. United States, 745 F.3d 1158 (Fed. Cir. 2014). “2d at 1320 (emphasis added) (quoting 37 U.S.C. § 313 (repealed 1980)). The plaintiff physicians in Adair sued, alleging that the HEW regulations defining the eligibility criteria were invalid, as they precluded plaintiffs from receiving variable incentive pay under the statute.”
Pardo v. United States, 227 Ct. Cl. 377 (Ct. Cl. 1981). “On May 6, 1974, Congress enacted the Variable Incentive Pay (VIP) statute, 37 U.S.C. §313 (1976), to provide increased monetary incentives of up to $13,500 per year to enhance recruitment and retention of physicians into the Armed Forces.”
Deggins v. United States, 39 Fed. Cl. 617 (Fed. Cl. 1997). “2d 1318 (1981), the court held that 37 U.S.C. § 313 (1976), 4 providing special pay for medical officers, was not money mandating and the court had no jurisdiction over the claim.”
Uraga v. United States, 4 Cl. Ct. 106 (Ct. Cl. 1983). “DISCUSSION By a statute then in effect, 37 U.S.C. § 313 (1980 Supp.) (repealed 1980), Congress authorized the Secretary of Defense to award variable incentive pay to enhance recruitment and retention of critically needed health professionals in specialties where shortages…”
Lin v. United States, 3 Cl. Ct. 213 (Ct. Cl. 1983). “Briefing has been completed. The facts relevant to ruling on the motions are not in any real dispute.”
McGee v. United States, 5 Cl. Ct. 480 (Ct. Cl. 1984). “2d 1318 (1981) (variable incentive pay statute, 37 U.S.C. § 313 ); Uraga v. United States, 4 Cl.”
In Re Marriage of Wicks, 80 Cal. App. 3d 329 (Cal. Ct. App. 1978). “It is clear from the record that husband was not eligible for variable incentive pay until he completed the military service obligation he incurred under “the Berry plan” ( 37 U.S.C. § 313 (a)(4); 1974 U.S. Code Cong.”
Collins v. United States, 101 Fed. Cl. 435 (Fed. Cl. 2011). “The United States Court of Claims in Adair confronted a group of claims by Public Health Service (“PHS”) physicians who were seeking “variable incentive pay” (“VIP”) under 37 U.S.C. § 313 (1976). Id. at 1319 . The statute, in relevant part, provided that certain medical…”
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.