37 U.S.C. § 555
Secretarial review
(a) Except as provided in subsection (d), when a member of a uniformed service entitled to pay and allowances under section 552 of this title has been in a missing status, and the official report of his death or of the circumstances of his absence has not been received by the Secretary concerned, he shall, before the end of a 12-month period in that status, have the case fully reviewed. After that review and the end of the 12-month period in a missing status, or after a later review which shall be made when warranted by information received or other circumstances, the Secretary concerned, or his designee, may—(1) if the member can reasonably be presumed to be living, direct a continuance of his missing status; or(2) make a finding of death.(b) When a finding of death is made under subsection (a), it shall include the date death is presumed to have occurred for the purpose of—(1) ending the crediting of pay and allowances;(2) settlement of accounts; and(3) payment of death gratuities.That date is—(A) the day after the day on which the 12-month period in a missing status ends; or(B) if the missing status has been continued under subsection (a), the day determined by the Secretary concerned, or his designee.(c) For the sole purpose of determining status under this section, a dependent of a member on active duty is treated as if he were a member. Any determination made by the Secretary concerned, or his designee, under this section is conclusive on all other departments and agencies of the United States. This subsection does not entitle a dependent to pay, allowances, or other compensation to which he is not otherwise entitled.(d) This section does not apply in a case to which section 1502 of title 10 applies.(Added Pub. L. 89–554, § 5(b), Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 628; amended Pub. L. 102–25, title VII, § 702(b)(1), (c), Apr. 6, 1991, 105 Stat. 117; Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title V, § 569(c)(1), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 351.)Historical and Revision Notes |
|---|
555(a) | 50 App. 1005 (1st and 2d sentences). | Mar. 7, 1942, ch. 166, § 5, 56 Stat. 145; Dec. 24, 1942, ch. 828, § 1 (3d par.), 56 Stat. 1093; Aug. 14, 1964, Pub. L. 88–428, § 1(4), 78 Stat. 437. |
| 50 App. 1014 (as applicable to § 1005 (1st sentence)). | Mar. 7, 1942, ch. 166, § 14 (as applicable to § 5 (1st sentence)), 56 Stat. 147; Apr. 4, 1953, ch. 17, § 1(e), 67 Stat. 21. |
555(b) | 50 App. 1005 (less 1st and 2d sentences). | |
555(c) | 50 App. 1009(b) (as applicable to § 1005). | Mar. 7, 1942, ch. 166, § 9(b) (as applicable to § 5); added Aug. 29, 1957, Pub. L. 85–217, § 1(c), 71 Stat. 492. |
Only that portion of the source law which is applicable to members of the uniformed services and their dependents is codified in this section.
In subsection (a), the words “member of a uniformed service” are substituted for “person”. The words “in a missing status” and “in that status” are substituted for “absence” in three places. The words “Secretary concerned” are substituted for “head of the department concerned” in two places. In the second sentence, the words “or his designee” are supplied on authority of 50 App. U.S.C. 1009 which is codified in part in revised section 556(a) of this chapter. In clause (1), the words “member” and “his” are substituted for “person’s” and “person”, respectively.
In subsection (b), the words “under subsection (a) of this section” are inserted for clarity. In clause (A), the words “day on which the 12-month period in a missing status ends” are substituted for “day of expiration of an absence of twelve months”. In clause (B), the words “under subsection (a) of this section” are substituted for “as hereinbefore authorized”. The words “Secretary concerned” are substituted for “head of the department concerned.” The words “or his designee” are supplied on authority of 50 App. U.S.C. 1009(a) which is codified in part in revised section 556(a) of this chapter.
In subsection (c), the first sentence is substituted for 50 App. U.S.C. 1009(b) (1st 31 words, as applicable to § 1005). The words “Secretary concerned” are substituted for “head of the department concerned”. The words “or his designee” are supplied on authority of 50 App. U.S.C. 1009(a) which is codified in part in revised section 556(a) of this chapter. The words “departments and agencies of the United States” are substituted for “departments of the Government” in view of the definition of “department” in 50 App. U.S.C. 1001(d). The words “This subsection does not entitle” are substituted for “Provided, That nothing in this section shall be construed as conferring . . . any right”.
Editorial NotesAmendments1996—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 104–106, § 569(c)(1)(A), substituted “Except as provided in subsection (d), when” for “When”.
Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 104–106, § 569(c)(1)(B), added subsec. (d).
1991—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 102–25 struck out “of this section” after “subsection (a)” in two places.
Notes of Decisions
Crone v. United States, 210 Ct. Cl. 499 (Ct. Cl. 1976).
“This is not a case in which the “common legal issue [here, the constitutionality of 37 U.S.C. §§ 555 and 556] is a predominant one, overriding any separate factual issues affecting the individual members” of the purported class.”
Darr v. Carter, 487 F. Supp. 526 (E.D. Ark. 1980).
· cites it 2× “He was initially listed as “missing in action” and the Air Force has initiated a proceeding for redetermination of his status, as set forth in 37 U.S.C. §§ 555 and 556. Plaintiff seeks to enjoin defendants and those acting under their authority from reviewing and changing the…”
Fors v. Lehman, 741 F.2d 1130 (9th Cir. 1984).
· cites it 2× “See 37 U.S.C. § 555 (c). This analysis reflects the prudential requirement that a plaintiff’s complaint fall within the zone of interests of the statute invoked.”
Darr v. Carter, 640 F.2d 163 (8th Cir. 1981).
· cites it 2× “37 U.S.C. §§ 555 , 556; AF Reg. 35-43. The case is then returned to Randolph Air Force Base for final action by the Manpower Control Center, which is charged with implementing the decision.”
McDonald v. McLucas, 371 F. Supp. 837 (S.D.N.Y. 1973).
“” So long as this order shall remain in force, defendants shall not, either personally or by their designees, make any official report of death or any finding of death with respect to any MIA, pursuant to 37 U.S.C. §§ 555 or 556, except that: (1) Defendants may proceed under the…”
Hopper v. Carter, 572 F.2d 87 (2d Cir. 1978).
“, and twenty other servicemen, who have been listed as captured or missing in action in Southeast Asia, and who either have been or are about to be subject to determinations of death under the Missing Persons Act, 37 U.S.C. §§ 555 and 556, appeal — by their parents or “next…”
Townsend v. Carter, 476 F. Supp. 1070 (N.D. Tex. 1979).
“Pursuant to 37 U.S.C. § 555 , the Air Force reviewed Captain Townsend’s case within twelve months of that date and continued his status as “Missing in Action” (MIA).”
Simmons v. United States, 754 F. Supp. 274 (N.D.N.Y. 1991).
· cites it 5× “Simmons was listed as MIA from the date of the crash until January 1973, when his case was reviewed in accordance with 37 U.S.C. § 555 . 1 Upon review, the overseas commander recommended that Simmons’ status be continued as MIA.”
Ward v. United States, 227 Ct. Cl. 90 (Ct. Cl. 1981).
“Streetman married Stephen Pipkin on February 12, 1972, the trial judge held that she was not Captain Ward’s wife or widow thereafter. As to the Air Force’s determination of June 20, 1978, as Captain Ward’s presumptive date of death, the trial judge was correct in pointing out…”
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.