Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

United States Vs. Bishop

United States vs Bishop

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided Jan-10-1887
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/85778

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
US Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number
120 U.S. 51
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

United States

Respondent

Bishop

Excerpt

united states v. bishop - 120 u.s. 51 (1887) u.s. supreme court united states v. bishop, 120 u.s. 51 (1887) united states v. bishop submitted december 6, 1880 decided january 10, 1887 120 u.s. 51 appeal from the court of claims syllabus this case is affirmed on the authority of united states v. symonds, just decided ( ante, 120 u. s. 46 ). the case is stated in the opinion of the court. mr. justice harlan delivered the opinion of the court. this case does not differ in principle from that of united states v. symonds, just decided. bishop is now, and has been for more than four years, a lieutenant commander in the navy. by direction of the secretary of the navy, he assumed the duties of executive officer of the training ship minnesota, on the 18th of april, 1884. during the period of such service, that vessel was stationed in new york harbor, cruising and moving about under her own power. her machinery and equipment were kept in order, and she was perfectly seaworthy, capable, upon short notice, of being used in a protracted cruise. the duties of bishop, while such executive officer, were more arduous and confining than those of officers of similar grade upon vessels in foreign waters. page 120 u. s. 52 for the reasons given in united states v. symonds, we are of opinion that the services of appellee were, within the meaning of § 1556 of the revised statutes, performed "at sea," and consequently it was rightly adjudged in the court below that he was entitled to sea pay, as established for officers of his grade, during the period of his service on the minnesota. judgment affirmed.

Full Judgment

United States v. Bishop - 120 U.S. 51 (1887)
U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Bishop, 120 U.S. 51 (1887)

United States v. Bishop

Submitted December 6, 1880

Decided January 10, 1887

120 U.S. 51

APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS

SYLLABUS

This case is affirmed on the authority of United states v. Symonds, just decided ( ante, 120 U. S. 46 ).

The case is stated in the opinion of the Court.

MR. JUSTICE HARLAN delivered the opinion of the Court.

This case does not differ in principle from that of United States v. Symonds, just decided. Bishop is now, and has been for more than four years, a lieutenant commander in the navy. By direction of the Secretary of the Navy, he assumed the duties of executive officer of the training ship Minnesota, on the 18th of April, 1884. During the period of such service, that vessel was stationed in New York Harbor, cruising and moving about under her own power. Her machinery and equipment were kept in order, and she was perfectly seaworthy, capable, upon short notice, of being used in a protracted cruise.

The duties of Bishop, while such executive officer, were more arduous and confining than those of officers of similar grade upon vessels in foreign waters.

Page 120 U. S. 52

For the reasons given in United States v. Symonds, we are of opinion that the services of appellee were, within the meaning of § 1556 of the Revised Statutes, performed "at sea," and consequently it was rightly adjudged in the court below that he was entitled to sea pay, as established for officers of his grade, during the period of his service on the Minnesota.

Judgment affirmed.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial