38 U.S.C. § 728
Misuse of Department purchase cards
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 1954–1996 · leading case: Saul L. Wellman v. Summer G. Whittier, Individually & as Adm'r of Vets.' Affairs, United States Vets. Admin., 259 F.2d 163 (D.C. Cir. 1958).
Saul L. Wellman v. Summer G. Whittier, Individually & as Adm'r of Vets.' Affairs, United States Vets. Admin., 259 F.2d 163 (D.C. Cir. 1958). “The provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 728 actually were in aid of *167 the Soviet Union, as well as of our other allies, for a person might have been guilty of rendering assistance to an enemy of the Soviet Union, then our ally, and by his conduct have predicated a forfeiture under 38…”
Tulingan v. Brown, 9 Vet. App. 484 (Vet. App. 1996). “554 -55, which later became 38 U.S.C. § 728 . The purpose of the statute is clear: In short, no person, within the meaning of 38 U.”
Tracy v. Gleason, 379 F.2d 469 (D.C. Cir. 1967). ““We cannot doubt that ample and substantial grounds dictated the congressional intention that a veteran’s service-connected disability compensation was not to be forfeited by virtue of an unreviewable decision in the agency that a veteran was guilty of so serious an offense as…”
Simmons v. United States, 120 F. Supp. 641 (E.D. Pa. 1954). “286 (other than insurance); 38 U.S.C.A. § 728 , July 13, 1943, c. 233, § 4, 57 Stat.”
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.