HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.gao/gaobacupq0001 and id is 1 raw text is:
12ZO
GAO
United States General Accounting Office
Washington, DC 20548
Office of
General Counsel
In Reply
Refer to:
The Honorable Alice Daniel
Acting Assistant Attorney General
Civil Division
Department of Justice
B-190168
Drc5 1979
Attention: LeRoy Southmayd, Jr., Trial Attorney
Commercial Litigation Branch
Dear Ms. Daniel:
Subject: Melvin Gray v. United States
Court of Claims Number 473-79C ag
We refer to your letter of October 29, 1979, reference
AD:DC:LS;amc, 154-473-79C, requesting our views and comments on
the above-captioned action, in which plaintiff seeks punt
d3amages]of $150,000 based on being underpaid and suffering
because of an error in his military record.
The records of this Office show that the plaintiff on
April 29, 1977, filed a claim for backpay believed to be due
by reason of an error in the computation of his military
service for longevity pay purposes. The period of his military
service was November 5, 1963, through March 13, 1964. His
claim was denied by letter dated June 21, 1977, from our Claims
Division on the basis that it was not presented within 6 years
of the date the claim first arose and was thus barred by the
act of October 9, 1940, 54 Stat. 1061, as amended by section 801
of the General Accounting Office Act of 1974, approved Janu-
ary 2, 1975, Pub. L. 93-604. Thereafter, the plaintiff appealed
the denial made by our Claims Division of June 21, 1977. A
decision B-190168 was given on that matter by the Comptroller
General of the United States on November 9, 1977, in which the
action of the Claims Division in disallowing the claim was
sustained. The plaintiff requested a review of that decision
in a letter to the President dated November 19, 1977, and in
letters to this Office dated January 9, February 15, and 16,
1979. In a letter dated December 30, 1977, and again on
May 29, 1979, the plaintiff was informed that we could find no
basis for further consideration of his claim.
0 ZJY 7](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.gao/gaobacupq0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)