The Judge Advocate General's Corps is a single organization made up of both military and civilian lawyers, legal administrators, paralegals, legal assistants, and court reporters. They are also members of two honorable professions: the profession of arms and the profession of law.
Provide principled counsel and premier legal services in support of the Cyber Center of Excellence and Fort Gordon.
A highly skilled, ETHICAL legal TEAM, trained and developed to provide premier CUSTOMER SERVICE all while setting the example as leaders in the Army and our profession.
Today, the insignia worn by all uniformed members of the Corps reflects the many components of the Corps' mission: the pen denotes the recording of testimony; the sword, the military character of the Corps' mission; and the wreath, the traditional symbol of accomplishment.
JAG Corps History
Origins in the American Revolution
In 1775, only a few days after assuming duties as commander-in-chief of the new army, GEN George Washington insisted that the Continental Congress appoint a lawyer to help with the many courts-martial being conducted. Congress acceded, and a "judge advocate," William Tudor, joined Washington's staff. This appointment of Tudor heralded the birth of a corps of lawyers and legal specialists that is today known as The Judge Advocate General's Corps. By 1776, this Army lawyer, known as the "Judge Advocate General," was personally conducting trials before courts-martial and other military tribunals. He acted not only as prosecutor, but also as legal adviser to the court and as "friend" of the accused.
While GEN Washington wanted a judge advocate to oversee the administration of military justice, his concerns also reflected the larger debate about justice and legal authority that was fueling the American Revolution. The new Nation envisioned by the Founding Fathers was a bold social and political experiment: the 'Rule of Law' would replace the 'Divine Right of Kings.' This Rule of Law was grounded in respect: government would respect individual rights and freedoms, and in return, individuals would respect the government's obligation to regulate and enforce standards of behavior. It is the Rule of Law, in both civilian life and in the military, that ensures Order, Justice, and Equality.
In any event, since the Revolution, the American Army has had its own lawyers---who assist commanders in enforcing Army standards and reinforcing Army values. Loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor, integrity and personal courage thrive when soldiers know that they will be treated equally, and that rules and regulations apply to all, regardless of rank or assignment. And judge advocates have always played a critical role in ensuring that these standards and values are obeyed.
Early years through Civil War period
Judge advocates served with honor and distinction in the early years of the Republic. In the Civil War era, Army lawyers played prominent roles in two historic legal events at the end of the conflict: The Lincoln Assassination Trials and the Trial of Captain Henry Wirz, commandant of the infamous Andersonville prison camp.
World War I
MAJ Marion W. Howze
At the beginning of World War I, the Judge Advocate General had a "Department" of 17 military lawyers. By December 1918, however, his department had expanded---along with the rest of the American Army---to 426 judge advocates. In any event, the increasing numbers of judge advocates also allowed the role of the Corps to expand; commanders turned to judge advocates for advice in both legal and non-legal matters. Thus, for example, MG Enoch H. Crowder, who had served as the Judge Advocate General since 1911, was appointed Provost Marshal during World War I. While serving in this non-judge advocate assignment, Crowder prepared the Selective Service Act of 1917, and supervised the registration, classification, and induction of nearly three million men in the armed services. In the meantime, rather fierce-looking officers like MAJ Marion W. Howze, performed more traditional legal work in the Judge Advocate General's Department. Howze, a 1903 graduate of the US Military Academy at West Point, was a judge advocate in France with the American Expeditionary Force (AEF).
MG Blanton Winship
And then, of course, there were always judge advocates who could 'do it all'---like COL Blanton Winship. Winship, a Georgia native and graduate of Mercer University's law school, commanded two infantry regiments while also serving as Judge Advocate of the First Army. He was more than equal to the challenge, for his extraordinary heroism and gallantry in combat earned him the Distinguished Service Cross and Silver Star. COL Winship went on to become The Judge Advocate General in 1931, and the Signal Center and Fort Gordon Staff Judge Advocate's office is named "Winship Hall" in his honor.
LTC Edward S. Thurston
After the war ended in France, judge advocates continued serving areas where fighting continued. Thus, for example, LTC Edward S. Thurston deployed with U.S. troops to Murmansk, in northern Russia in 1919. As the only lawyer in the AEF-North Russia, LTC Thurston was responsible for the administration of military justice, and he reviewed more than 250 courts-martial cases between August 1918 and April 1919.
MAJ Albert J. Galen
Thousands of miles away, in Vladivostok, Siberia, MAJ Albert J. Galen served as the sole American lawyer in the AEF-Siberia. Like Thurston, he endured months of bitter cold, snow and ice.
And, like his colleague in Murmansk, MAJ Galen also faced a variety of legal issues. Galen, for example, researched the legal ramifications of a marriage between an American soldier and a Russian citizen. Was a marriage performed by a Russian Orthodox priest 'legal' under U.S. law? Should an Army chaplain instead perform it? Could the new wife return with her soldier husband to the U.S.?
Some issues were more somber. The 'Red' or Bolshevik forces battled constantly with the 'White' or non-communist forces, and the American soldiers were often caught in the middle. Moreover, neither the 'Reds' or 'Whites' had much interest in the observing the customary laws of land warfare; prisoners of war were not ordinarily taken. The Americans, however, accepted the surrender of combatants, and MAJ Galen served as the command's representative on the "Allied Commission of Prisoners of War." No doubt Galen observed that Bolsheviks falling into American hands fared better than those who did not. In this photograph, for example, Czech soldiers allied with the 'White' forces have just captured this group of Bolsheviks. They were executed a short time later.
World War II
In 1940, the Army was once again preparing for war. The legal challenges presented by this buildup were staggering, and now Army lawyers were making policy recommendations as well as providing legal advice and opinions. When the threat of war became reality, judge advocates would once again be tested on the battlefield as well as in the courtroom.
COL Thomas H. Green
After the Japanese surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, the operational tempo increased markedly for judge advocates. Some were immediately called upon to handle missions of incredible importance and sensitivity. In Hawaii, for example, COL Thomas H. Green, who had been serving as Staff Judge Advocate for the Hawaiian Department, assumed duties as the executive to the military governor. In that position, Green was largely responsible for promulgating and issuing orders and other measures implementing the transition from civil government to military government on December 7, 1941. In most cases, these orders were without precedent and required the broadest legal knowledge in order to make them properly effective. As a practical matter, COL Green was largely responsible for the day-to-day operation of the military government in the Territory of Hawaii.
1LT Samuel Spitzer
Combat in the European Theater of Operations was bloody and brutal. 1LT Samuel E. Spitzer was well aware of this on the morning of July 31, 1944. Laying down his weapons, Spitzer walked down the center of a small French town, calling out in German for the German soldiers to surrender. As a result, 508 Germans were captured. Spitzer's bold action saved numerous American lives, and for his courage, the young lieutenant was awarded the Silver Star.
COL Hubert E. Miller
While Spitzer received the Silver Star as a judge advocate, others who would later serve in the Corps were being recognized for their personal courage. Thus, for example, then infantry 1LT Hubert E. Miller (pictured here as the Staff Judge Advocate, 1st Logistical Command, Vietnam, in 1966) received the Distinguished Service Cross for extraordinary heroism in Normandy in 1944. A superb athlete, Miller later participated in the 1952 Olympic Games (four-man bobsled), becoming the only judge advocate to compete in the Games while a member of the Corps.
MG Myron C. Cramer (center)
But World War II was not just about "judge advocates in combat." Recognizing that they would enhance mission success if the Corp assisted soldiers with their personal legal problems, the Corps' leaders established a formal "Legal Assistance Plan." In this photograph, taken at the Army-Navy Country Club in March 1944, MG Myron C. Cramer, TJAG, and other dignitaries, celebrate the 1st anniversary of the Army legal assistance program.
The end of World War II thrust Army lawyers into a new area. Judge advocates assisted with the prosecution of Nazi Party leaders for "Crimes Against Humanity" at the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, Germany. Trials also were conducted in Tokyo, where Japanese war criminals were prosecuted.
Less publicized were the trials of the rank and file military personnel who had actually committed or ordered war crimes. The Judge Advocate General's Department supervised these trials, and judge advocates participated in many of them as prosecutors. In many of these trials, Army lawyers also served as defense counsel to ensure that German and Japanese defendants received adequate legal representation.
Finally, there were courts-martial arising out of the chaos of war that had nothing to do with war crimes. In 1946, for example, COL Jack Durant and his wife, CPT Kathleen Nash, were court-martialed for stealing jewels belong to the House of Hesse. These "crown" jewels, worth millions of dollars, had been discovered the year previously by CPT Nash in Schloss Friederishoff. The Hesse family had hidden the jewels in this schloss, their family's castle, for safekeeping. After Nash discovered the hiding place, however, she, Durant, and another officer smuggled the jewels to the United States. At trial, all three accuseds claimed that, as looting was commonplace in Occupied Germany, their misconduct should be excused. The court members were unconvinced. Durant, shown in this photograph with his two defense lawyers, received 15 years in jail. Nash received five years. Much of the Hesse treasure was never found---and remains unrecovered.
Creation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice
An immediate effect of a unified Department of Defense (DoD) in 1947 was the need for a unified criminal code that would govern all military personnel. As a result, the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) was drafted in 1949, approved in 1950, and took effect on May 31, 1951 in the midst of the Korean War. The UCMJ was the most comprehensive change in military law in America's history, providing the individual soldier with needed legal safeguards and establishing a system of judicial review comparable to that enjoyed by civilians. Key provisions included the new right for an enlisted accused to have at least 1/3 enlisted soldiers on the court-martial panel; prior to the enactment of the UCMJ, all courts-martial were heard by juries of officers.
This photograph shows the first all enlisted court-martial, convened in France in July 1953.
The new UCMJ came into effect while the fighting in Korea was already underway. Judge advocates quickly mastered the new system, aided by their legal specialists. It was during this period the legal specialist series MOS was created, defining the duties and training of enlisted legal clerks. This was part of a continuing effort to establish a formal program of instruction and training for Corps personnel that began in World War II.
MG E.M. Brannon (center)
During the Korean War, judge advocates served with distinction. In this photograph, MG E. M. Brannon, TJAG, confers with BG Phillip D. Ginder, CG, 45th Infantry Division, in 1953. COL Claude Reitsel, Jr., SJA, US Eighth Army, looks on.
LTC Howard S. Levie
As the fighting in Korea ended, however, judge advocates continued to demonstrate their value. For example, COL Howard S. Levie (shown here as a LTC), an expert in international law, was the key draftsman of the 1953 Korean Armistice Agreement.
Central to JAG Corps instruction and training was The Judge Advocate General's School (TJAGSA), which opened at the University of Michigan law school in September 1942. In this photograph, students of an early "JAG School" class pose for a photograph.
5th OCS Class at Ann Arbor
Transforming raw civilians into military attorneys with good soldier skills required innovative approaches. Consequently, the Corps ran its own Officer Candidate School (OCS) from 1943 to 1945. In the first photograph, students in the fifth OCS class take their class photograph in early 1944. In the second photograph, students of the 10th Officer Candidate class, on the school 'parade ground' at the Univ. of Michigan, take their oaths as officers in March 1945.
10th OCS Class at Ann Arbor
At the end of the war, the school was deactivated, but the need for a permanent training facility was obvious and, in 1950, TJAGSA reopened its doors on Fort Myer, Va. This photograph shows the members of the first class at Ft. Myer.
1st TJAGSA Class at Ft Myer
TJAGSA's location in the Washington, D.C. area, however, was shortlived; in 1951 the school re-located to the grounds of the University of Virginia in Charlottesville. Today, TJAGSA continues to be the only American Bar Association accredited law school in the country that focuses exclusively on military law, and teaches judge advocates and civilian attorneys from the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard, as well as other agencies outside of the Defense Department.
Legal specialists receive their basic instruction at Fort Jackson, South Carolina. Because of the high standards required for legal work, enlisted personnel in the Corps often are very mature and well-educated. As their careers progress, legal specialists must also receive advanced training at Charlottesville.
The Corps' warrant officer legal administrators, who are selected from the ranks of the Corps' legal specialists, receive their basic training at TJAGSA in Charlottesville. Again, as they progress in their careers, they receive advanced training at TJAGSA.
Finally, the Corps' ever-expanding ranks of civilian lawyers regularly attend continuing education classes at TJAGSA, with a select few also attending the year-long Master of Military Laws program there.
One distinguished judge advocate who did much for TJAGSA was COL William S. Fulton, who served as commandant in the 1970s. After retiring from active duty, Fulton continued serving the Corps as the Clerk of Court, U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals, until he finally retired from Federal service in 1998.
COL William S. Fulton
The complex nature of guerrilla war spawned a host of complicated legal issues. Just as type of war waged by the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong demanded non-traditional responses from the American Army, some judge advocates also realized that the traditional way of providing legal services was no longer way enough. Consequently, a number of judge advocates spearheaded unique efforts to enhance mission success in ways not seen previously. For example, LTC George E. Eblen (pictured here with South Vietnamese Army Chief of Staff LTG Le Van Ty, in 1962) decided that he should begin monitoring war crimes committed by the Viet Cong against Americans.
LTC George E. Eblen (left)
Eblen's decision to tape record all interviews of U.S. personnel claiming mistreatment resulted in a command policy that a military lawyer participate in all future debriefings involving war crimes.
COL George S. Prugh (pictured here as TJAG), likewise initiated a number of non-traditional initiatives. While serving as the Staff Judge Advocate at Military Assistance Command, Vietnam, from 1964 to 1966, Prugh created a U.S.-Vietnamese Law Society and arranged for Vietnamese lawyers to study in the United States. He also established a legal advisory program that monitored real-world operations of South Vietnam's criminal justice system. Of particular significance, however, was COL Prugh's successful effort in persuading the South Vietnamese military that its conflict with the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese was no longer an internal civil disorder. This was a significant achievement for, once its military leaders accepted the international nature of the conflict, the South Vietnamese government also acceded to this view---and agreed that the provisions of the Geneva Convention on Prisoners of War would be applied.
MG George S. Prugh
As always, judge advocates acquitted themselves with honor and courage on the battlefield. Here, judge advocates assigned to the 25th Infantry Division "Tropic Lightning" pose for a photograph in 1970.
Conducting a court-martial in a combat zone could be dangerous, but that was Standard Operating Procedure in Vietnam. In this photograph, taken in Vietnam shortly after the enactment of the Military
Judge advocate CPT Ken Gray was awarded a Bronze Star medal for meritorious service in Vietnam. At about the same time, infantry 1LT Mike Nardotti received a Silver Star for gallantry. Twenty-five years later, they would serve together on the same team with Mike Nardotti as The Judge Advocate General and Ken Gray as The Assistant Judge Advocate General. Gray was also the Corps' first black general officer.
Post-Vietnam Era and the Birth of Operational Law
MG Ken Gray
The Army's experience in Vietnam planted the seeds for an end to the almost exclusive focus of judge advocates on military justice---and peacetime legal issues. The murders at My Lai, and the investigations and courts-martial that followed, all culminated in a 1974 Department of Defense Directive tasking Army judge advocates with a new mission: ensuring that all U.S. military operations complied strictly with the Law of War. Accomplishing this new responsibility now required Army lawyers regularly to immerse themselves in many aspects of operational planning and execution---and thus assume a role that earlier judge advocates did not see as part of their duties.
A number of perceptive judge advocates realized that this new legal mission inexorably meant judge advocate integration into operations at all levels, and they initiated efforts to move the Corps toward this end. The real catalyst for change, however, occurred in late 1983, when American forces launched Operation URGENT FURY. The operation in Grenada was a wake-up call for judge advocates, and the Corps' leadership now formally recognized that a contingency-oriented Army did require, in fact, judge advocates adept at handling more than traditional peacetime legal missions. It was essential that Army lawyers now be schooled in a new role and a new legal discipline: operational law---a compendium of domestic, foreign and international law applicable to U.S. forces engaged in military operations at home and abroad.
Over the next fifteen years, the JAG Corps reconfigured its assets and training to support this new judge advocate role. By 1989, when U.S. forces began deploying to Southwest Asia as part of Operation DESERT SHIELD, the JAG Corps was ready.
War in Southwest Asia
Army lawyers and legal specialists worked around the clock to solve the legal problems created by the rapid deployment to Saudi Arabia. Commanders at all levels now saw their judge advocates as important force-multipliers. They were first class attorneys who prosecuted and defended courts-martial, adjudicated claims, and advised individual soldiers on a variety of personal legal problems. But, their new role meant that these same lawyers also contributed to mission success in countless other ways---from drafting Rules of Engagement and providing advice on targeting, using combat contracting to purchase special fabric for force protection, and assisting Division (G-2) intelligence personnel in gathering war crimes evidence, to constructing bunkers and fighting positions, investigating friendly fire incidents, and drafting war trophy policies.
A critical player in legal decision making at the highest level was COL Raymond C. Ruppert, the Staff Judge Advocate, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM). In this photograph, taken at Safwan, Iraq in March 1991, Ruppert stands next to his boss, GEN H. Norman Scharzkopf, the Commander-in-Chief, CENTCOM.
With the commencement of DESERT STORM, Army lawyers moved to the front with their commanders. This photograph shows the three corps-level staff judge advocates of DESERT STORM. From left to right are COL John Bozeman, XVIII Airborne Corps, COL Walt Huffman, VII Corps, and COL Bill Hagan, 22d Support Command. All three looked for new ways for lawyers to enhance mission success.
The Corps Looks to the 21st Century
The soldiers of Force XXI and the Army After Next must be diplomats, managers, relief workers, and police officers as well as warriors. Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia and Rwanda illustrate the complicated political, economic, and social issues---legal and non-legal---confronting commanders. It is no longer unusual, for example, for Army lawyers to work along side judge advocates from other nations. Thus, while serving as the U.N. Mission in Haiti Force (UNMIH) Legal Advisor, MAJ Mark S. Ackerman, was assisted by Canadian judge advocate MAJ Marc B. Philippe. In this photograph, taken in Port-au-Prince in 1995, Ackerman (left) and Philippe (right) advise COL Khatak, Commander, Pakistan Contingent, UNMIH Military Force.
The digital battlefield and the increased 'optempo' of both combat missions and Operations Other Than War will increase and intensify these challenges. Commanders will require soldiers who can recognize issues and provide solutions quickly.
The JAG Corps is preparing its men and women to meet these challenges. To aid them is the new Corps doctrine, enunciated in FM 27-100, Legal Support to Operations. At long last, men and women in the Corps have clear guidance on the role of the Army lawyer and how legal support to military operations is provided through operational law and the "Six Core Legal Disciplines" of administrative law, civil law, claims, international law, legal assistance, and military justice.
This doctrinal foundation for legal operations will allow judge advocates to better serve the Army. And, while the metamorphosis of the JAG Corps from an organization of special staff officers to today's emphasis on judge advocate integration into operations will continue, the Corps is ready for new challenges in the new millennium.
Corps in the War on Terrorism
The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center propelled the United States into a new kind of war. Operation Enduring Freedom began in late 2001 and was followed by Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003. By 2007, more than a million uniformed personnel had deployed to Afghanistan or Iraq, or both, and there were some 160,000 soldiers in Iraq alone.
Judge advocates have been a part of this war from the beginning. Army lawyers and noncommissioned officer paralegals serving with Task Force Rakkasan arrived in Afghanistan in January 2002, where they provided the full range of legal services. Judge advocates continue to serve in that country in a North Atlantic Treaty Organization-led military operation.
As for Iraq, judge advocates assigned to the 3d Infantry, 82d Airborne, and 101st Airborne Divisions, as well as 173d Airborne Brigade and smaller special operations units, were the some of the first members of the JAG Corps to stand on Iraqi soil in March and April 2003. Thousands of members of the Regiment have served in Operation Iraqi Freedom since then.
The Legal Assistance Division of the Office of the Staff Judge Advocate is committed to helping Soldiers, retirees, and eligible family members by providing no cost legal advice and assistance in reviewing and/or preparing legal documents.
Please be advised that Fort Gordon Legal Assistance Attorneys cannot represent anyone in court. However, in such cases the Legal Assistance Attorneys can provide a civilian attorney referral list.
Effective January 9, 2023, the Legal Assistance Division will return to in-person operations.
The Legal Assistance Division is open Monday through Friday in accordance with the hours listed below. The office will be closed on training holidays and on all federal holidays.
Notary and power of attorney services are available on a walk-in basis and do not require an appointment. To speak with an attorney, you must have an appointment. To make an appointment, please call 706-791-7812/7813. Please have all pertinent documents available for your appointment.
HOURS OF OPERATION:
8 a.m. - 4 p.m.
8 a.m. - 4 p.m.
|8 a.m. - 4 p.m.|
|Noon - 4 p.m.|
8 a.m. - 4 p.m.
A weekly divorce briefing is held at 1 p.m., and it is mandatory for clients to attend the briefing prior to consulting with an attorney about divorce/separation. Please contact our office for more information on the briefing.
Estate planning appointments is a multi-step process. First, a client must complete the intake forms and Will Worksheet and return them to the Legal Assistance Office. Next, the client is scheduled for an attorney consultation to discuss the Worksheet. After the initial consultation, the attorney drafts the client’s Will, and the client returns to the Legal Assistance Office to sign the Will. The Will Worksheet is available in the Estate Planning section below.
Will signings are conducted on Thursday afternoons and are pre-scheduled. Clients arriving at the Legal Assistance Division to sign their Will shall be given priority over walk-ins for other power of attorney or notary services.
In accordance with federal law and Army regulation, persons are eligible to receive legal assistance include:
- Active Component members of the Armed Forces and their dependents (includes all service branches, officers of the Public Health Service (PHS) Regular Corps, and members of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
- Retired members of the Armed Forces, PHS, and NOAA who are receiving retired pay (retired Reserve Component members who are not yet receiving retired pay are not eligible) and their dependents.
- Reserve Component members of the Armed Forces, and their dependents, if:
- On active duty or fulltime National Guard duty orders for more than 29 days
- They have received alert or mobilization orders, if the mobilization will be for more than 29 days (legal issue must relate to the mobilization)
- They were mobilized for more than 30 days and have been released from active duty orders (eligibility period is two times the mobilization period; 30-day mobilization results in 60-day eligibility period upon release from active duty)
- Surviving dependents of eligible clients listed above (active, reserve, retired)
- Department of Defense civilian employees:
- Against whom pecuniary liability has been recommended under AR 735-5
- Who are to deploy to a combat zone, but only for matters related to their imminent deployment.
- Who have accepted employment outside the U.S. on matters related to processing for overseas employment
Under federal law, 100% disabled veterans and their dependents are not entitled to legal assistance services unless the person is also receiving retired pay.
- Probate (GA & SC; GA Per Stirpes v. Per Capita Distribution)
- Casualty Assistance Support
- Advance Medical Directives
- Powers of Attorney
- Last Will and Testament - This worksheet should be filled out and brought to the Legal Assistance Division for preparation of a Last Will and Testament.
- Divorce and Separation (before an individual may consult an attorney in our office related to divorce/separation, he or she MUST attend the mandatory divorce briefing. Divorce briefings are presented every Wednesday at 1300 by the Legal Assistance Division. Please call the office to signup for the divorce briefing.)
- Child Custody and Visitation
- Child Support and Spousal Support
- Family Support under AR 608-99
Real Property and Personal Property
- Tenant Lease Termination, SCRA and GA
- Georgia Security Deposit Disputes
- House Purchases and Sales
- Motor vehicle issues
- Consumer Protection
- Military Spouse Residency Relief Act
- Credit and Debt Issues
- Warranty Issues
- Consumer Action Handbook - The 2017 Consumer Action Handbook, published by the Federal Consumer Information Center (FCIC), has valuable consumer information. It has advice and consumer tips on: car repair, purchase, and leasing; shopping from home; avoiding consumer and investment fraud; home improvement and financing; choosing and using credit cards wisely; and much more. Also includes the Consumer Assistance Directory with thousands of names, addresses, telephone numbers web site and e-mail addresses for national consumer organizations, better business bureaus, corporations, trade associations, state and local consumer protection offices, state agencies, military consumer offices, and Federal agencies.
- Financial Readiness Planning – Army resource for information on pay, financial responsibility, credit reporting, budgeting, and similar topics.
- Information on Sextortion - Sexual Exploitation of U.S. service members - can be found HERE..
- Information on the Court Settlement regarding Harris Jewelry, including Cash Refunds and Account Balance Forgiveness – can be found HERE.
Military Administrative Issues
- Line of Duty
- Financial Liability Investigations of Property Loss (FLIPL)
- OER/NCOER Appeals
- Bars to Reenlistment
- Security Clearances
- Hardship Cases
- Military Dependents
- GOMOR Implications of Refusing BAC Test
Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA)
- Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA)
- Stay of Court Proceedings
- Interest Rate Cap
- Lease Termination
The Claims Division processes two broad categories of claims:
1. Tort Claims - Claims against the U.S. for personal injury, death, or property damage caused by the negligence of military personnel acting in the scope of employment or occurring incident to the noncombat operations of the armed services. These include claims under the Military Claims Act, the Federal Tort Claims Act, the National Guard Claims Act, the Foreign Claims Act, and a number of other claims statutes.
2. Affirmative Claims - Claims on behalf of the U.S. against negligent third parties for damage to military property or injury to military personnel.
Personnel Claims - The Center for Personnel Claims and Support (CPCS) processes all claims for loss and damage of personal property occurring incident to service. These include claims for damage to household goods during a PCS move. More information about the CPCS and Personnel Claims may be found on the Personnel Claims information page by clicking HERE.
Click here for the claims forms you will need to fill out to present your claim to the claims office. You will need ADOBE Acrobat Reader to read the forms.
Instructions for Filing a Negligence Claim
SF Form 95 This will open on a new page.
Contact Info: (706) 791-6523
USARMY Ft Gordon USAG Mailbox Claims Office
CLAIMS BRANCH OFFICE HOURS:
MON. - WED., FRI.
8 - 11:30 a.m.
12:30 - 3 p.m.
8 - 11:30 a.m. (By Appt. Only)
12:30 - 3 p.m.
HOURS OF OPERATION
Monday through Friday: 7:30 a.m. - 4 p.m.
The Administrative and Civil Law Division then provides advice to these various offices on a variety of subject-specific actions affecting the day-to-day operation of the installation.
|AER||Alcoholic Beverages||Animal Control|
|Army Band||Article 32 Advice||Article 138 Complaints|
|Banks & Credit Unions||Chapel||Civil Disaster Support|
|Civilian Personnel Law||Claims (General)||Club System|
|Copyrights||Driving Privileges (click for form)||Eisenhower AMC|
|Employment (Off-Duty)||Ethics||Fair Housing Law|
|Family Housing||Family Members||Fire Department|
|Fisher House||Garnishment||Gate Inspections|
|Gifts||Hunting & Fishing||Intellectual Property|
|Military Personnel Law||MP Operations||Political Activity|
|Posse Comitatus||Post Newspaper||Property Loan/Lease|
|Smoking Policies||Sponsorship Program||Standards of Conduct|
|States Law||Support to Civil Authority||Travel|
The Military Justice Division supervises installation-wide UCMJ matters by offering appropriate advice to commanders in determining the disposition of pending or possible disciplinary actions (letters of reprimand to courts-martial) to include administrative separations under AR 635-200 and AR 600-8-24.
Additionally, this division conducts educational classes on military justice related topics to include, but not limited to, training of new commanders and unit briefings.
The Federal Litigation Division serves as the mechanism for the criminal prosecution of civilians (non-military members) on the Fort Gordon Military Reservation. This division is manned by a Judge Advocate who is appointed by the U.S. Department of Justice to serve as a Special Assistant U.S. Attorney (SAUSA) for the Southern District of Georgia. The Federal Litigation Division prosecutes both felony and misdemeanor offenses in the U.S. Federal District Court. Offenses routinely prosecuted consist of minor traffic violations, DUI, shoplifting, drug possession and distribution, assaults, trespassing and burglary.
A controversy before a court or a "lawsuit" is commonly referred to as “litigation”. If it is not settled by agreement between the parties it would eventually be heard and decided by a judge or jury in a court. Litigation is one way that people and companies resolve disputes arising out of an infinite variety of factual circumstances.
The term "litigation" is sometimes to distinguish lawsuits from “alternate dispute resolution” methods such as "arbitration" in which a private arbitrator would make the decision, or “mediation” which is a type of structured meeting with the parties and an independent third party who works to help them fashion an agreement among themselves.
Update as of 20 October 2022:
The Cyber Center of Excellence and Fort Gordon Office of the Staff Judge Advocate at Fort Gordon will not be hosting a Tax Center in 2023 (tax year 2022). However, there are still many ways military members, retirees, and qualified dependents can receive either free or reduced-fee tax services.
We cannot endorse any specific tax filing service, but below are links to services that offer free or reduced cost filing for military members, retirees, and qualified dependents. This is not a complete list and no endorsement is implied. By utilizing these types of programs, as soon as you receive your W-2 or 1099, you can immediately begin filing your return.
Many of these programs offer clients the ability to file more complex returns and deductions than what the Tax Center has historically been able to provide.
Click below for other helpful resources to read and consider as you prepare for the tax season.
Common Tax Mistakes to Avoid
Commonly Missed Tax Deductions on Your Tax Return
Taxability of Domicile to Duty Benefits for CY 2022
Military Spouse Residency Relief Act
Raising a Child but Don't File a Tax Return? Information on Quick Action required by the IRS can be found here.
The information and resources provided above do not constitute legal or tax advice. Tax laws, benefits, credits, and other filing procedures/requirements can change annually. If you need further information, please contact the Legal Assistance Division at 706-791-7812 /7813.