140 C. Cls.

thereunder, judgment for plaintiffs Arnold S. Levin, Albert A. Levin, Frank K. Levin, and Jacob Levin was entered for $11,000. The petition was dismissed as to Knox Homes, Inc. No. 246-54. DECEMBER 4, 1957

Southern Pacific Company.

Transportation of airplane landing mats.

On a memorandum report of the commissioner stating that the parties had reached agreement at a pretrial conference, based on the court's decision in The Western Pacific Railroad Company v. United States, 137 C. Cls. 394, judgment for the plaintiff was entered for $381,431.08.

REPORT OF DECISIONS

OF

THE SUPREME COURT

IN COURT OF CLAIMS CASES

STANDARD-VACUUM OIL COMPANY, PETITIONER, v. THE UNITED STATES

[No. 50336]

[139 C. Cls. 113; 355 U. S. 893]

Just compensation; use of property during occupancy of Japan. Petition dismissed.

Plaintiff's petition for writ of certiorari denied by the Supreme Court December 9, 1957.

R. J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY, PETITIONER, v. THE UNITED STATES

[No. 254-54]

[138 C. Cls. 1; 355 U. S. 893]

Income and excess profits tax; preferential dividends. Petition dismissed.

Plaintiff's petition for writ of certiorari denied by the Supreme Court December 9, 1957.

FRANK M. BRENNAN, AS TREASURER OF CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO, PETITIONER, v. THE UNITED STATES

[No. 142-53]

[139 C. Cls. 433; 355 U. S. 890]

Statute of limitations; eminent domain. Petition dismissed.

Plaintiff's petition for writ of certiorari denied by the Supreme Court December 9, 1957.

140 C. Cls.

NEW YORK MAIL AND NEWSPAPER TRANSPORTATION COMPANY, PETITIONER, v. THE UNITED STATES

[No. 162-54]

[139 C. Cls. 751; 355 U. S. 904]

Contract; pneumatic tube mail distribution; cancellation. Plaintiff to recover in part.

Plaintiff's petition for writ of certiorari denied by the Supreme Court December 16, 1957.

INDEX DIGEST

ACTIVE DUTY STATUS.

See Pay and Allowances XIII, XIV.

ACT OF AUGUST 10, 1946.

See Pay and Allowances V, VI.

ALCOHOL TAX REFUND.

See Report to Congress V, VI, VII.
ALTERNATIVE GROUND.

See Taxes XXXIX.

APPLICABLE TARIFFS.

See Transportation of Freight III, IV, V, VI.
CARRYBACK.

See Taxes XVIII, XIX, XX, XXI, XXII, XXIII, XXIV, XXV,
XXVI.

CHARITABLE DEDUCTION.

See Taxes I, II, III, IV.

CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT ACT.

See Civil Service Retirement Annuity I, II, III.

CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT ANNUITY.

I. Plaintiff's claim is for a civil-service annuity under the Act of
May 29, 1930. For some 15 years plaintiff had been a civilian
employee of the United States but in September 1920 he resigned
to accept a commission in the Army. He served in this capacity
until his retirement in 1938. It is held that plaintiff, not being
in the classified civil service since his resignation and at the time
the 1930 act was passed, is not entitled to the benefits there-
under. The petition is dismissed with prejudice. Holmes, 346.
United States 39 (15)

II. Plaintiff's attempt to redeposit a refund of retirement contribution
which he had received 18 years earlier added nothing in support
of his claim. He had not been reinstated or retransferred to a
classified position. Id.

United States 39 (15)

III. The Act of 1942 broadening the coverage of the Civil Service
Retirement Act had no application to plaintiff since it was passed

140 C. Cls.

CIVIL SERVICE RETIREMENT ANNUITY-Continued

four years after the end of his military service and 18 years
after he was separated from the civil service. Id.

I. Plaintiff sues as surety under a contract for the repair of two
vessels which for four prior years had been laid up at Lee Hall,
Virginia. The Government's motion to dismiss is based on
the contention that exclusive jurisdiction of the controversy
is vested in the courts of admiralty under either the Suits in
Admiralty Act or the Public Vessels Act, or both. Under
either of these acts plaintiff's claim would be barred by the
statute of limitations. It is held that repair work on a vessel
laid up for four years was no different from repair work on
any other structure, that the bonds which plaintiff executed
were applicable to any building or public work, and that the
work was not maritime in nature, and was not within the
coverage of either the Suits in Admiralty Act or the Public
Vessels Act, and the motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction
is overruled. Continental Casualty Co., 500.

Courts 518

II. The Public Vessels Act was primarily intended to cover claims
for damages as a result of a tort, but it also extends to con-
tracts for salvage. No other contract claim, however, is
mentioned. Id.

III. An act should not be construed so as to deprive a person of an
existing remedy given him by another statute, unless the
intention of Congress to do so is expressed in unequivocal
language. Id.

Action 35

IV. The decision in Sinclair Refining Company v. United States,
129 C. Cls. 474, is distinguished from the instant case in that
Sinclair was concerned with operation of a vessel and not
with construction or repair. The decision in that case is not
to be extended beyond the facts there shown. Id.
Courts

518

V. Plaintiffs contracted to supply hay to the Remount Station at
Fort Reno, Oklahoma. Because of a severe drought in 1952
which had a ruinous effect on the hay crop in Oklahoma,
plaintiffs were required to pay greatly increased prices for
hay obtained in Oklahoma and also found it necessary to