Robert Fritz v. Director of Veterans Administration, Etc.
Cases that cite this one
5 later published cases cite this decision.
- Board of Assessors v. Driscoll (Mass. 1976)
- Hayes v. Administrator, Veterans Administration (Okla. 1975)
- Perry v. United States (Court of Claims 1975)
- Michael S. Ross v. United States of America (9th Cir. 1972)
- Holley v. United States (District Court, S.D. Ohio 1972)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
We have carefully considered the appellant’s brief and the clarification of appellant’s position presented to us by him at oral argument, acting in pro. per. Appellant has had a full opportunity to present his claims to the District Court and to us. However, neither the District Court nor this court has been authorized *155 by any Act of Congress to decide the merits of appellant’s claim. On the contrary, Congress, by the enactment of 38 U.S.C. § 211(a) has expressly deprived the courts of any jurisdiction to do so. Under the circumstances, the District Court had no choice; the law required it to dismiss the action. The same law requires us to affirm the judgment. No possible benefit can come to appellant by the continuance of this litigation. It should now be brought to a close. For the same reason, appellant’s motion, filed October 27, 1969, must be denied.
The judgment is affirmed. The motion is denied.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.