Featured Chrome Extensions:

Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

Related Cases

Estelle v. Smith, 451 U.S. 454, 101 S.Ct. 1866, 68 L.Ed.2d 359
View Case »
LegalZoom.com, Inc. v. North Carolina State Bar, Not Reported in S.E.2d, 2014 WL 1213242, 2014 NCBC 9
View Case »
In re UPL Advisory Opinion 2003-2, 277 Ga. 472, 588 S.E.2d 741, 03 FCDR 3308
View Case »
McIntosh v. Mills, 121 Cal.App.4th 333, 17 Cal.Rptr.3d 66, 04 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6992, 2004 Daily Journal D.A.R. 9468
View Case »
In re Marriage of King, 80 Cal.App.4th 92, 95 Cal.Rptr.2d 113, 00 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3196, 2000 Daily Journal D.A.R. 4297
View Case »
Justia Law Link
LexisNexis Link
Westlaw Link
CourtListener Link
Oyez Link

O’Hagan v. U.S., 52 Ct.Cl. 535, 1917 WL 689

Facts

The paymaster's clerk in the Navy incurred travel expenses while performing his official duties. He submitted a claim for reimbursement of $248 for mileage. The claim was initially disputed, leading to the legal proceedings to determine the validity of the reimbursement request.

The paymaster's clerk in the Navy incurred travel expenses while performing his official duties. He submitted a claim for reimbursement of $248 for mileage. The claim was initially disputed, leading to the legal proceedings to determine the validity of the reimbursement request.

Issue

Whether the paymaster's clerk is entitled to reimbursement for mileage incurred while performing official duties.

Whether the paymaster's clerk is entitled to reimbursement for mileage incurred while performing official duties.

Rule

The court applied the principle that government employees are entitled to reimbursement for necessary travel expenses incurred in the performance of their official duties.

The court applied the principle that government employees are entitled to reimbursement for necessary travel expenses incurred in the performance of their official duties.

Analysis

In applying the rule, the court examined the nature of the travel undertaken by the paymaster's clerk and determined that it was indeed necessary for the performance of his official duties. The court found that the expenses were reasonable and properly documented, thus supporting the clerk's claim for reimbursement.

In applying the rule, the court examined the nature of the travel undertaken by the paymaster's clerk and determined that it was indeed necessary for the performance of his official duties. The court found that the expenses were reasonable and properly documented, thus supporting the clerk's claim for reimbursement.

Conclusion

The court concluded that the paymaster's clerk was entitled to the reimbursement of $248 for mileage incurred during his official duties.

The court concluded that the paymaster's clerk was entitled to the reimbursement of $248 for mileage incurred during his official duties.

Who won?

The paymaster's clerk prevailed in the case because the court recognized his right to reimbursement for necessary travel expenses.

The paymaster's clerk prevailed in the case because the court recognized his right to reimbursement for necessary travel expenses.

You must be