STATEMENT OF APPROPRIATIONS, 1948 AND ESTIMATES, 1949 The justifications will be found on page 69 of the justifications. We will insert pages 69 and 70 in the record at this point. (The justification tables referred to are as follows:) Summary statement relating appropriation estimates to current appropriationsCourt of Claims 1948 budget estimates (including amendments and recommended supplementals).. 1948 appropriations in annual act 1948 appropriations in supplemental act... Total appropriations for 1948. Net difference, 1949 over 1948: Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation-Salaries and expenses, Court of Claims 1948 appropriation in annual act_ Additions: Within-grade salary advancements. Regular pay in excess of 52-week base, 5 U. S. C. 944____ Total estimate for 1949_ Analysis by objects Object 01 Personal services.. 02 Travel... 04 Communication services.. Penalty mail. 05 Rents and utility services. 06 Printing and binding.. 07 Other contractual services. 08 Supplies and materials. 09 Equipment....... Total.... $450,000 511, 900 450, 000 $3,950 5, 000 455, 000 Mr. STEFAN. I notice that your appropriation for 1948 was $461,000 and that you are requesting $487,100, or an increase of $26,100. Judge Littleton, are you going to justify these appropriations, and have you a statement to make to the committee? If so, you may proceed at this time. Judge LITTLETON. Mr. Chairman, we are asking for only what you gave us last year without any additions other than the $5,000, which is automatic. Mr. STEFAN. Plus $21,100, repairs to the Court of Claims Building. Judge LITTLETON. Yes. I will explain that item. WORK LOAD OF THE COURT Mr. STEFAN. Will you justify those increases and tell us something about your work load? Judge LITTLETON. I can make a brief statement with reference to the court's docket. On July 1, 1947, we had 1,409 cases pending; 546 new cases were filed up to December 1, 1947, making a total of 1,955 cases. Two hundred and twenty-one cases have been disposed of by the Court, and we have on the docket 1,734 cases as of December 1, 1947. Mr. STEFAN. How does that compare with previous years-say the last 3, 4, or 5 years? Is your work load going up or down? Do you have a break-down of your work load there? Judge LITTLETON. Yes, I have a break-down of the cases pending on July 1, 1946, July 1, 1947, ad December 1, 1947. Mr. STEFAN. We will insert that in the record at this point. (The tabulation referred to is as follows:) Comparison of pending regular and class cases I. FROM JULY 1, 1946, TO JULY 1, 1947 NOTE. Of the 1,734 pending cases, 64 percent are class and 36 percent regular cases. Judge LITTLETON. The number of cases coming in now is increasing somewhat. That is the present indication. For the last fiscal year ended July 1, 1947, we had 381 class cases filed and 225 separate individual cases, or a total of 606. So far from July 1 to December 1 we have had 546 new and remanded cases. That indicates an increase in the cases that are coming in. The volume of war cases that we had expected to receive has not greatly increased so far. The statute allows 6 years within which suits may be filed. However, many of the cases that we are receiving now are cases growing out of the conditions existing because of the requisition and contract cases and other cases of that type. OUTSTANDING CASES Mr. STEFAN. Tell us something of the outstanding cases that are going to require work on the part of the court. Judge LITTLETON. We have a number of Indian cases that have been taking a great deal of time to hear and determine. Most of those cases involve accounting and valuation. We have a number of contract cases for large construction projects during the period of the war. Mr. STEFAN. Put into the record at this point the number of Indian cases. Judge LITTLETON. Yes. We have 33 Indian cases. The 1,734 pending cases are classified as follows: Mr. STEFAN. Are the Indian cases growing out of the activity of the Indian Claims Commission? Judge LITTLETON. No, sir; we have had no cases from the Indian Claims Commission so far. We had on our docket on July 1, 1946, 15 Indian cases; on July 1, 1947, we had 32 cases; and on December 1, 1947, we had 33 Indian cases. Mr. STEFAN. What are some of the big cases outside of the Indian cases? Judge LITTLETON. There are no outstanding cases. All the cases are of the usual general type that fall within our general jurisdiction-contract cases involving war contracts; requisition cases involving the taking of private property without payment of just compensation; and patent-infringement cases. We have had a large number of class cases involving overtime compensation of customs officers, Panama Canal employees, immigration officers, and certain groups of civilian employees of the War Department. For the most part, the cases growing out of the war effort involve many new and complicated issues and large records. REPAIR OF COURT OF CLAIMS BUILDING Mr. STEFAN. Now let us go back to the repair of the Court of Claims Building, in the amount of $32,100. I notice that you are asking for that for this year. I have had some communication with Judge Jones about that. Judge LITTLETON. Mr. Chairman, that was a situation where we, rather than rent outside space IMPROVEMENTS TO BUILDING Mr. STEFAN. We appropriated the money for renting outside space. Now you are asking for an appropriation for 1949 out of that? Judge LITTLETON. No. This is the situation about that, Mr. Chairman: We have included this $25,000, which is an estimate of the architect as to what the cost will be to provide these additional rooms in the present building, and we have put it in here because the estimate had been made and we wanted to list the item for your consideration. If the request of the court to transfer the $25,000 in our present 1948 appropriation is granted so that we can start these improvements early in the calendar year 1948, then we will not need this $25,000 for the fiscal year 1949. Mr. STEFAN. We do not need to put it in here. I do not see any reason for your putting it in. You will give us some language so that you can transfer that, will you not? Judge LITTLETON. We have prepared the necessary language. Mr. STEFAN. I have had a letter from Judge Jones. I had the chief clerk of the committee call him about that, and it was perfectly satisfactory to me to have him use that rent money which we gave him for the fiscal year 1948 for these repairs. We are now informed that the amount has gone up into the deficiency item. Judge LITTLETON. That is correct. Mr. STEFAN. Is there anything else you would like to tell the committee? Judge LITTLETON. I suppose that you have in mind the $1,000 for the air-conditioning unit. Mr. STEFAN. That is right. Judge LITTLETON. That represents the estimate of the Architect for the units in one of the justice's office, who stays here during the summertime and does his work here. Mr. STEFAN. You have concluded your statement, then? Judge LITTLETON. Yes. Mr. STEFAN. Now, members of the committee, I want to call your attention to the fact that our former colleague, Evan Howell, is now on the Court of Claims. We want to welcome you here. Is there anything you would like to add to what Judge Littleton has had to say? Judge HOWELL. I do not think there is anything I can add. This matter has been very well explained by Judge Littleton and does not represent any unusual request for additional funds. It is merely the authorization to use rent money in our existing appropriation to repair the building. Mr. STEFAN. We know that. Sometimes, though, we like to see a cut. Judge HOWELL. We think that that would be a major economy. We have not asked for any more money. Judge LITTLETON. We are cutting out the rent, Mr. Chairman. That is one item. Mr. HART. That will amount to a reduction of $18,600 for 1949, if you allow us to use this $25,000 now in our 1948 appropriation to provide additional rooms. CATEGORIES OF CLAIMS Mr. HORAN. I might say, Mr. Chairman, I do not want to take too much time here, but I would like more information. It so happens that every individual in the United States is not a lawyer and does not know much about how the courts are run. I would like to know the categories of claims they get. You say here, at page 71, that they are instituted upon constitutional grounds, or under any Federal law or regulation, or claims arising out of any contract with the Federal Government and its agencies. That is broad. You say also: The court has jurisdiction to hear and determine all claims for damages in cases not sounding in tort in which the claimant would be entitled to sue the United States in a court of law, equity, or admiralty if the United States were suable. I want to know whether that covers all possible claim suits against the Government. Judge LITTLETON. Practically, except tort cases and purely equitable claims not involving a claim for a money judgment. It includes any case that involves a claim for compensation or salary. It includes cases which either House of the Congress may send to the court for finding of fact and recommendations, so that you can decide whether you want to appropriate and pay a claim or not. It may be a gift, gratuity, or an equitable claim. We have claims involving express contracts, such as for construction, materials, and supplies, and the like, or implied contracts growing out of relationships and negotiations between the parties, where they do not reduce their agreement to writing, which would give rise to consensual arrangement, obligating the Government to make reasonable compensation. We have many cases for the enforcement of rights given by acts of Congress. We have suits to recover compensation for the use of patented inventions. Then we have departmental cases, which, of course, can be referred over to us by the head of the Department for an opinion on the law as to what they should do with reference to paying it. We have the Indian cases which arise, involving construction of treaties and agreements in connection with the taking of property and the disposition of funds and accounting problems, and so forth. Mr. HORAN. Has the legislation recently enacted setting up the Indian Claims Commission added to or subtracted from the bulk of your work? Judge LITTLETON. It has not yet had any effect, so far as I know, but Congress has not enacted any Indian claims jurisdictional acts |