U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, 1999

Walter D. Small v. United States

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · Decided March 12, 1999 · Plager, Clevenger, Gajarsa

180 F.3d 1343; 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 4154; 1999 WL 274467 (Federal Reporter, Third Series)

Counsel

Guy J. Ferrante, King & Everhard, Falls Church, Virginia, for plaintiff-appellant., Armando O. Bonilla, Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, Department of Justice, Washington, DC, David M. Cohen, Director, James M. Kin-sella, Assistant Director, of counsel, Lt. Col. Ralph A. Bauer, Chief, Military Personnel Branch, Lt. Col. Steven J. Pecinov-sky, Attorney, General Litigation Division, U.S. Air Force, Arlington, Virginia, for defendant-appellee.

Cases that cite this one

8 later published cases cite this decision.

Alger E. Haselrig, Jr. v. United States (Fed. Cir. 2003)
Haselrig v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 2002)
Thumser v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 2002)
Chisolm v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 2001)
Campa v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 2001)
King v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 2001)
Fulton v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 2000)
Fluellen v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 1999)

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

ORDER

A combined petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing in banc having been filed by the Appellant, and a response thereto having been invited by the court and filed by the Appellee, and the petition for rehearing having been referred to the panel that heard the appeal, and thereafter the suggestion for rehearing in banc and response having been referred to the circuit judges who are in regular active service,

Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The petition for rehearing is granted for the limited purpose of amending the court’s opinion of October 14,1998.

(2) The suggestion for rehearing in banc is declined.

(3) The mandate of the court will issue on March 19,1999.

ORDER

Mr. Small has petitioned for rehearing of this court’s decision dated October 14, 1998. We grant Mr. Small’s petition for the limited purpose of amending our earlier opinion as follows:

1. Delete the paragraph bridging pages 11 and 12 [158 F.3d 576, 582](begin-ning with “Furthermore” and ending with “this issue as well.”)

So ORDERED.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.