154 Ct. Cl.

JAPANESE-AMERICAN EVACUATION CLAIMS-Continued
LOSSES-Continued

Evacuation losses due to anticipation of evacuation—Continued
Where an American family of Japanese ancestry was evacuated in
May 1942, and thus prevented from planting rice for the second
year of a two-year lease, the resulting loss is a loss of a capital
investment in a leasehold and not a loss of anticipated profits or
earnings under 50 U.S.C. App. § 1982 (b)(5), and is recoverable
under the Japanese-American Evacuation Claims Act of 1948 as
amended, 70 Stat. 513. Sonoda, 130.

Where an American woman of Japanese ancestry owned a farm, the
south half of which was encumbered by a deed of trust held by an
American family which had been friendly toward plaintiff in the
past and had tolerated delinquencies in payment from time to time
but which, after the attack on Pearl Harbor, had decided to take
advantage of the precarious situation of the Japanese-American
owner to secure a new deed of trust to cover the entire parcel of
land and then to foreclose and acquire the entire property, the court
concludes that the act of plaintiff in signing the new deed of trust
which resulted in the loss of the north half of the land was the
reasonable and natural consequences of plaintiff's anticipated evacu-
ation from the Imperial Valley in California. Sonoda, 130.
United States

99

RECOVERY-MEASURE OF.

Land valuation.

Date of valuation.

In a suit to recover losses under the Japanese-American Evacuation
Claims Act of 1948 as amended, 70 Stat. 513, where the loss involved
is real property, the date on which the property should be valued
for the purposes of recovery depends on the circumstances of the
case in the light of the intention of Congress, expressed in the act,
that equity and justice in its broad sense should be applied to the
adjudication of the claim. Thus, where a claimant lost her property
in 1942 but it was not until 1948 that Congress first provided a forum
in which the claimant could recover a sum to replace such loss,
equity and justice require that the claimant receive the value of
the land lost as of 1948. Sonoda, 130.

United States 113

STATUTE-CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION.
Japanese-American Evacuation Claims Act.

Equity and justice.

The direction by Congress to the Court of Claims to apply rules
of equity and justice to claims before it under the Japanese-American

154 Ct. CI.

JAPANESE-AMERICAN EVACUATION CLAIMS-Continued
STATUTE-CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION-Continued

Japanese-American Evacuation Claims Act-Continued

Equity and justice-Continued

Evacuation Claims Act of 1948 as amended, 70 Stat. 513, was intend-
ed to authorize the court to apply principles of equity and justice in
their broad sense rather than in the strict sense in which those
terms are understood and applied in equity jurisprudence. Sonoda,
130.

United States 113

JAPANESE-AMERICAN EVACUATION CLAIMS ACT. See Japanese-

American Evacuation Claims.

JUDGMENTS.

ESTOPPEL BY JUDGMENT.

Conclusiveness of adjudication.

Persons concluded.

Codefendants.

Where codefendants in a suit in which a judgment was obtained
against them were adversaries, they will be bound by the judgment
therein in a subsequent suit between each other. Thus, where a
man brought a suit against a rail carrier and the Government ship-
per and recovered a joint and several judgment against both for
injuries found to have been caused by the negligence of both de-
fendants, the findings of the district court that the codefendants
were guilty of negligence is binding in a later suit by the carrier
against the Government to recover freight charges in the Court of
Claims. National Bondholders Corp. v. Seaboard Citizens National
Bank of Norfolk, 110 F. 2d 138. Union Pacific Rd. Co., 427.
Judgment

704

LAND VALUATION. See Japanese-American Evacuation Claims.
LAW APPLICABLE. See Civilian Pay.

LIKE CONDITIONS OF SERVICE. See Contracts.

LIMITATION OF ACTIONS. See Military Pay.

LIMITATION OF LIABILITY. See Carriers.

LIQUIDATED DAMAGES. See Contracts.

LIQUIDATION OF BUILDING AND LOAN ASSOCIATION. See Income
Tax.

LLOYD-LA FOLLETTE ACT. See Civilian Pay; Court of Claims.

LOSSES. See Japanese-American Evacuation Claims.

MARITIME BROKERAGE FEE CONTRACT. See Contracts.

MERCHANT SHIP SALES ACT. See Contracts.

154 Ct. Cl.

MILITARY PAY.

ACTIVE DUTY PAY.

Discharge.

Under honorable conditions.

Effect of.

A general discharge under honorable conditions containing a refer-
ence to Air Force Regulation 35–66 pertaining exclusively to homo-
sexuality carries with it the same stigma as an undesirable dis-
charge and in the case of a female airman, it precludes her reenlist-
ment. AFR 39-10, October 27, 1953. It is certainly not the legal
equivalent of an honorable discharge and the refusal of the Air
Force to issue plaintiff an honorable discharge in the place of such
a general discharge creates a controversy of which the court may
take judicial cognizance. Murray, 185.

Armed Services 22

Wrongful or invalid discharge.

Recovery-measure of.

Enlistment for fixed term.

An airman discharged from military service in violation of a valid
regulation of the Air Force is entitled to recover his pay and allow-
ances from the date of his wrongful discharge to the date on which
his enlistment would ordinarily have expired. He is also entitled
to recover all of his reinlistment bonus, including the allegedly
unearned portion thereof. Murray, 185.

Armed Services 23.1(6)

Regulation of executive department.

Violation of-what constitutes.

Where applicable Air Force Regulations (39-10, October 27, 1953)
require that an honorable discharge must issue where certain stand-
ards of conduct and performance have been met by the airman
during his current period of service, a serviceman who qualified
under the regulation but who was given a general discharge based
on misconduct in a prior enlistment, has been discharged in viola-
tion of the regulation of an executive department and is entitled
to recover the pay lost during the unexpired period of his six-year
enlistment. Service v. Dulles, 354 U.S. 363; Watson v. United States,
142 Ct. Cl. 749. Murray, 185.

Where a doctor inducted into the Army under the draft laws had
been ordered to report for special registration, Priority No. 111,
physical examination and was thereafter given a certificate of
acceptability of specialist, medical category, and, after induction,
was required to perform the services of a doctor but without com-

154 Ct. Cl.

MILITARY PAY-Continued

ACTIVE DUTY PAY-Continued

Rank for appointment—Continued

Doctors Draft Act-Continued

missioned rank or pay commensurate with his training and pro-
fessional education, his rights under section 4 of the Doctors Draft
Act as amended, 50 U.S.C. App. § 454a (a), have been violated and
he is entitled to both the proper commissioned rank and pay of a
doctor. Belsky, 206.

United States 20.10 (3)

Successive draft registrations.

Where a regular registrant for the draft becomes a doctor and
a special registrant, the special registration, when filed, should
displace the earlier regular registration, and when the special
registrant is later inducted as a medical specialist and is required
to perform the duties of a doctor in the service, he should have
the rank and pay of a doctor. Belsky, 206.

United States 20.10 (3)

LIMITATION OF ACTIONS.

Accrual of cause of action.

Reconsideration of rejected claim following change in adminis-
trative interpretation of law.

In a claim for disability retired pay which had been rejected dur-
ing the period when the Secretary of the Army was of the opinion
that an officer was not entitled to disability retirement with
pay for a disability incurred during his enlisted service and which
claim was later reconsidered by a Disability Review Board after
the Secretary changed his administrative interpretation of the law
to permit disability retirement for an enlisted service disability,
the Secretary has not finally completed action on the claim for dis-
ability retirement until he approves the Review Board's action.
Where such secretarial approval does not occur until June 7, 1956,
a petition filed in 1958 is timely and the officer is entitled to recover
his disability retired pay back to the date of his release from active
duty in 1944. Capps v. United States, 133 Ct. Cl. 811. Ludzinski,
215.

Armed Services 13.5(5), 13.6(1)

PAY.

What constitutes military pay.
Retired pay.

13.5(1)

The compensation paid to a retired member of the military or naval
forces is not in the nature of a "pension" but is "pay".
United States, 129 Ct. Cl. 792, cert. denied, 350 U.S. 842.
443.
Armed Services

Tanner v.

Hostinsky,

154 Ct. Cl.

MILITARY PAY-Continued

RETIRED PAY (DISABILITY).

Computation of pay.

Service creditable.

Quartermaster clerk service.

While service as a "field clerk" in the Army or the Quartermaster
Corps is creditable service for longevity purposes in computing
retired pay under section 412 of the Career Compensation Act of
1949, 63 Stat. 802, service as a clerk in the Quartermaster Corps
was not the sort of service referred to in that act since it was
civilian service subject to civil service rather than Army laws and
regulations. See Scholl v. United States, 82 Ct. Cl. 606, in which
it was held that under a similar statute (section 11 of the Act of
May 18, 1920, 41 Stat. 601, 604), a plaintiff with almost identical
service was not entitled to count his service as a clerk in the Quar-
termaster Department. Beebee, 209.

Armed Services 13.5 (8)

Entitlement to disability retirement.
Administrative remedies.

Failure to exhaust.

Where an airman discharged in violation of a valid regulation of
the Department of the Air Force directed all his efforts at the
administrative level to have his general discharge changed to an
honorable discharge and to have deleted from his record all ref-
erences to AFR 35-66, and where he took no steps to secure dis-
ability retirement with pay, his petition in the Court of Claims
claiming for the first time the right to disability retired pay on
the ground that he had a service-incurred disability, will, to that
extent, be dismissed for failure to exhaust his administrative reme-
dies. Murray, 185.

Armed Services 23.5

Presumptions.

Service-incurrence or aggravation of disability.

How rebutted.

Under Army Regulations providing for the presumption that a
disability manifesting itself in a member of the armed services
while on active duty was incurred in line of duty, a finding of pre-
existence of the disability may not be made on the basis of "medical
judgment" alone, but must be made on the basis of well-established
medical principles. Siegel v. United States, 148 Ct. Cl. 420. Ludzin-
ski, 215.

Under Army Regulation 40-1025, psychoneurosis is listed as one
psychiatric condition which would be considered to be in line of duty
even when occurring in individuals in whom the predisposition, but
not the actual disease itself, existed prior to entry into the service.