Wood v. United States

Background

A Navy officer who served as an aide to the Admiral sought to receive the higher rank and pay that, he argued, should be matched to Army aides under an assimilating rule in the Navy Personnel Act of March 3, 1899. The trial court entered judgment for the defendants, the appellate court affirmed, and the Supreme Court heard the appeal and issued its decision on April 1, 1912.

Reasoning

The central question was whether the Navy officer was entitled, regardless of his actual rank while serving as an aide, to the higher rank and pay provided for aides to the General of the Army under §1019 of the Revised Statutes through §13 of the Navy Personnel Act (a rule that treats Navy pay like comparable Army pay). The Court said no. It explained that a prior proviso to §1094 affected which Army office could be matched for pay, that the relevant Army office had ceased to exist after events described in the statute and was not revived in a permanent way, and that a gap or odd result in the law cannot be fixed by the courts creating a new office or pay. The Court therefore affirmed the judgment denying the officer’s claim.

Real world impact

As a result, Navy officers who served as aides to the Admiral do not receive the higher Army-equivalent rank and pay under the cited statutes. Any correction of the pay difference is a matter for Congress to address, not for the courts to create or grant.