STAHL v. USA
| 1:2018cv00496 |
| December 28, 2018 |
| United States Federal Claims Court |
| COFC Office |
| Military Pay - Correct/Reinstate |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1491 Tucker Act |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
73
REPORTED OPINION and ORDER denying 64 Motion to Dismiss; granting in part and denying in part 63 Motion for Judgment on the Administrative Record; granting in part and denying in part 64 Cross-Motion for Judgment on the Administrative Record. The Court remands the case to the AFBCMR and stays all proceedings until the remand period terminates. The Court directs the Clerk to serve a certified copy of this Order and the complaint, along with a copy of the Court's docket sheet, to the AFBCMR. Joint Status Report due by 11 December 2023 and every sixty days thereafter. The remand period shall terminate 10 April 2024. Signed by Judge Ryan T. Holte. (jf) Service on parties made.
|
|
Filing
33
UNREPORTED OPINION AND ORDER: Denying 27 Motion to Terminate the Stay of Proceedings and Motion for Order Granting Relief; Granting 29 Motion to Extend Stay of Proceedings(Government's status report due by 9/23/2019). Signed by Judge Ryan T. Holte. (vds) Service on parties made.
|
|
Filing
16
OPINION AND ORDER: granting in part and denying in part 11 Motion to Dismiss - Rule 12(b)(1) and (6). The involuntary discharge claim is remanded for consideration to the AFBCMR. ( Status Report due by 3/27/2019). Signed by Senior Judge Susan G. Braden. (ac7) Service on parties made.
|
| Search for this case: STAHL v. USA | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
