Norton Rose Fulbright represents army officer in Military Pay Act case

Norton Rose Fulbright represented Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) Jonathan Hirsch in a Military Pay Act case concerning the computation of the army’s Mandatory Retirement Date (MRD), the date by which an officer must be retired from the military.

LTC Hirsch was mandatorily retired by the Army in 2016—28 years after he had been commissioned as an officer. During his tenure, LTC Hirsch spent three years in law school and joined the Army JAG Corps after obtaining his law degree.

Per 10 USC 14706, if an officer meets the criteria for participating in a program of advanced education to obtain a professional degree, the military must exclude the officer’s three years of service from the computation of the officer’s MRD.

Upon being forced to retire from the military in 2016, LTC Hirsch claimed he should be allowed to serve until 2019, since he met the criteria under section 14706. The case turned on the proper interpretation of that statutory provision. The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sided with LTC Hirsch’s interpretation, overturned the lower court decision of the US Court of Federal Claims and found that LTC Hirsch met the criteria of section 14706, when properly interpreted.

As a result, LTC Hirsch is now entitled to, among other things, compensation for the additional three years of service, which he should have been allowed to complete before his mandatory retirement. The ruling will likely affect many other military personnel who also obtained advanced degrees during their service tenure.

LTC Hirsch was represented by Tom Coulter (Washington, DC) with assistance from Allie Silverman (New York).