5 U.S.C. § 5308
Omitted]
[omitted]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases, 1975–2001 · leading case: George Squillacote v. United States, 739 F.2d 1208 (7th Cir. 1984).
George Squillacote v. United States, 739 F.2d 1208 (7th Cir. 1984). “Section 5382(b) prohibits the application to SES of only two pay limitations, those in 5 U.S.C. §§ 5308 and 5373. In making this specific and narrow prohibition, Congress clearly expressed its intent that other pay limitations, including that in Section 304(a), would apply to…”
McCorkle v. United States, 559 F.2d 1258 (4th Cir. 1977). “McCorkle, on behalf of federal government employees whose salaries are determined by the pay rates for grades 15 to 18 of the General Schedule, appeals the judgment of the district court upholding the constitutionality of § 3(a) of the Federal Pay Comparability Act of 1970 [ 5…”
Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees v. Hoffmann, 427 F. Supp. 1048 (N.D. Ala. 1976). “The salary limitations of 5 U.S.C. § 5308 apply to BMDSCOM, that is clear.”
Williams v. United States, 240 F.3d 1019 (Fed. Cir. 2001). “5 U.S.C. § 5308 provides that General Schedule employees may not be paid at a rate in excess of the basic rate for Level V of the Executive Schedule.”
Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees, Local 1858 v. Callaway, 398 F. Supp. 176 (N.D. Ala. 1975). “Last, as to this section the plaintiffs contend that the defendants have used AR235-5 as a basis for avoiding government personnel limitations placed upon BMDSCOM and the salary limitations of 5 U.S.C. § 5308 . The plaintiffs introduced expert testimony from Mr.”
Application of Conflict of Interest Rules to the Conduct of Gov't Litig. by Private Attorneys (OLC 1980). “Because o f the ceiling now imposed by 5 U.S.C. §5308 , the maximum per diem rate paid Special Assistant United States A ttorneys is $182.”
Constr. of Certain Statutory Provisions Relating to the Foreign Serv. Ret. & Disability Sys. (OLC 1979). “” Section 406 allowed any par ticipant in the Retirement System whose salary was limited by 5 U.S.C. § 5308 to compute his or her annuity based on his or her highest single annual salary instead o f the average 3-year form ula.”
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.