United States v. Kelly
Cases that cite this one
21 later published cases cite this decision.
- Miller v. United States (United States Court of Federal Claims 2015)
- Carl L. McTaggart Appellant-Plaintiff v. Secretary of the Air Force and United States of America, Appellees-Defendants (7th Cir. 1972)
- Olenick v. Brucker (District Court, District of Columbia 1959)
- Bernstein v. Herren (District Court, S.D. New York 1956)
- Marshall v. Wyman (United States District Court for the Northern District of California 1955)
- Griffin v. United States (United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas 1953)
- Hironimus v. Durant (4th Cir. 1948)
- United States ex rel. Hirshberg v. Malanaphy (2d Cir. 1948)
- Ex Parte Drainer (United States District Court for the Northern District of California 1946)
- Fong Chew Chung v. United States (9th Cir. 1945)
- United States v. Caprio (U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Military Review 1980)
- Commonwealth v. Sipe (Montgomery County Court of Quarter Sessions 1950)
- Durant v. Hironimus (District Court, S.D. West Virginia 1947)
- United States ex rel. Hirshberg v. Malanaphy (District Court, E.D. New York 1947)
- Lamb v. Kroeger (Iowa 1943)
- Zearing v. Johnson (Cal. Ct. App. 1935)
- United States Ex Rel. Hirshberg v. Cooke (Supreme Court of the United States 1949)
- Parker v. Anderson (Vt. 1942)
- Cole v. United States (Court of Claims 1899)
- Smith v. Keith & Perry Coal Co. (Kan. Ct. App. 1889)
- United States v. Landers (Supreme Court of the United States 1876)
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
delivered the opinion of the court.
"We do not think that, under the circumstances of the present case, the bounty was forfeited. The able lawyer who fills at present the post of Judge Advocate General, in a case similar to the present, held that “the honorable discharge of the deserter wras a formal final judgment passed by the government upon the entire military record of the soldier, and an authoritative declaration by it that he had left the service in a status of honor; that as such, it dispensed altogether with the supposed necessity that the soldier must obtain bountj- by removal, by order, of the charge of desertion from the rolls, and amoünted of itself to the removal of any charge or impediment in the way of his receiving bounty.” With this opinion we entirely concur.'
Judgment affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.