In the case of Cornelius, Acting Director, Office of Personnel Management v. Nutt et al., 1984, the U.S Supreme Court ruled on a dispute over retirement benefits for federal employees who had served in both civilian and military capacities. The petitioners argued that their military service should be included when calculating their annuities under the Civil Service Retirement Act (CSRA). However, this was opposed by the Office of Personnel Management which contended that such inclusion would result in double counting since they were already receiving separate pensions for their military service. The court sided with the government's interpretation of CSRA stating it did not intend to provide dual benefits for periods of overlapping services. Therefore, it held that an employee’s years spent serving in a non-civilian capacity could not be counted towards his or her civil service pension if he or she was also drawing a separate pension based on those same years.

In the dissenting opinion for Cornelius v. Nutt, Justice Brennan disagreed with the majority's interpretation of the Civil Service Reform Act (CSRA). He argued that Congress intended to provide federal employees with a comprehensive and integrated scheme for resolving employment disputes. According to him, this should include claims arising from alleged violations of reemployment rights under veterans' preference laws. The CSRA provides procedures through which aggrieved employees can seek redress; it does not limit or preclude judicial review unless expressly stated in its provisions. Therefore, he believed that federal courts have jurisdiction over such cases as they fall within their general federal-question jurisdiction granted by 28 U.S.C §1331. Furthermore, he criticized the majority’s reliance on legislative history instead of clear statutory language and expressed concern about denying veterans access to full judicial review of their reemployment rights claims.