Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Lewis B. Jones v. United States

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, No. 2020-2298 · judgment March 31, 2022


Certiorari denied · January 9, 2023
Pre-decision estimate: 3% cert probability

Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.

Question presented

10 U.S.C. § 1201 provides, in relevant part, that a member of the armed forces is entitled to retirement pay when the Secretary of Veterans Affairs assigns him a disability rating of at least 30 percent. 10 U.S.C. § 1201(a), 1201(b)(3)(B). Petitioner Lewis B. Jones (“Jones”) was separated from service in 1988 with a 10 percent disability rating based on migraines, after being struck in the eye by the door of an armored personnel carrier. Years later, after advances in medical technology, it was determined that the accident had, in addition to migraines, also caused Traumatic Brain Injury with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Jones’ disability rating was increased, but Jones, in 2020, was denied retirement pay. In what dissenting Judge Newman termed “a significant change in law and policy,” the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that Jones’ 2020 suit to obtain retirement pay accrued in 1988 and was therefore time-barred under the Tucker Act, even though: (i) Jones’ disability rating was far below 30 percent in 1988; and (ii) it was not until 2020 that Jones was denied retirement benefits while having a disability rating of at least 30 percent. Moreover, the Federal Circuit held that subsequent advances in medical technology cannot suspend the accrual of a claim for retirement pay. The questions presented are as follows. 1. Whether a cause of action for retirement pay can accrue and for the statute of limitations to run before a service member receives a disability rating of at least 30 percent, as the Federal Circuit held, or

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Jonathan Alan Herstoff
Haug Partners LLP

For respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar
Solicitor General

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference

Proceedings

  1. Jan 09 2023
    Petition DENIED.
  2. Dec 21 2022
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/6/2023.
  3. Dec 20 2022
    Reply of petitioner Lewis Jones filed. (Distributed)
  4. Dec 07 2022
    Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
  5. Nov 08 2022
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including December 7, 2022.
  6. Nov 07 2022
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from November 18, 2022 to December 7, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
  7. Oct 06 2022
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including November 18, 2022.
  8. Oct 05 2022
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 19, 2022 to November 18, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
  9. Sep 15 2022
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due October 19, 2022)