National Guard Soldiers File Federal Class Action
BOSTON--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 11, 2006--
Lawsuit Claims Massachusetts National Guard Failed to Reimburse
Guardsmen $73 Million for Basic Allowances and Expenses

The Massachusetts National Guard refused to reimburse millions of
dollars to soldiers called to active duty following the 2001 terror
attacks and threatened guardsmen who pursued their financial claims,
according to a federal lawsuit filed today.

Four Massachusetts National Guard soldiers filed the class action this
morning in U.S. District Court in Boston. According to attorneys for
the plaintiffs, the Massachusetts National Guard (MNG) refused to
reimburse more than $73 million in food, lodging and commuting
expenses to hundreds, if not thousands, of MNG soldiers who served
active duty from Sept. 12, 2001, through now. Many of these soldiers,
including one of the plaintiffs, served in Massachusetts before
deployment to Iraq.

The soldiers involved sometimes traveled more than 100 miles a day to
perform their duties at locations around the state, including Cape
Cod, Ayer, Bedford, Chicopee, Plymouth and the Quabbin Reservoir. Many
had to buy their own meals and pay $6 a night to sleep in a barracks
bed.

"These men and women interrupted their lives to answer the call of
their country. They've done so at significant personal expense. Yet
instead of rewarding them, the government has cashed in on their
sacrifices," said John Shek, attorney for the plaintiffs. "Worse, when
some of these soldiers fought for the reimbursements that were rightly
theirs, the bureaucrats at the Massachusetts National Guard declared
war on them."

The lawsuit, Tortorella, et al v. Donald H. Rumsfeld, et al, names all
U.S., Massachusetts, Army and MNG officials needed to obtain payment
of the soldiers' reimbursement claims. The complaint also specifically
identifies leaders at the MNG Command Center who denied the
reimbursements. The current presiding MNG Adjutant General, Brigadier
General Oliver J. Mason Jr., was in charge of MNG Operations,
including personnel issues, during the class period.

The four plaintiffs were among many Massachusetts National Guard
soldiers activated for temporary duty in early December 2001. In the
post 9/11, anti-terror environment, their assignments included
security patrols, lock-downs and construction projects at bases across
the state.

The temporary duty assignments were standard operating procedure for
the military, but the orders themselves were highly irregular, said
Constance Driscoll, a military law specialist who is advising the
plaintiffs. Soldiers on temporary duty, known as TDY, have
historically been reimbursed for meals - up to $34 a day - plus
lodging and commuting expenses. But, to the puzzlement and detriment
of these soldiers, their activation orders stated: "Per Diem Not
Authorized."

When the plaintiffs sought reimbursement of these basic expenses,
their senior officers refused and threatened to drop them from their
missions.

Retired Capt. Louis P. Tortorella, one of the plaintiffs, spent
$14,625 of his own money for basic living expenses while on active
duty for 21 months at Camp Edwards, Massachusetts Military Reservation
on Cape Cod.

"When you enlist in the military, you expect to make many sacrifices.
But requiring us to spend our own money for food and shelter while on
active duty is just plain wrong," said Tortorella, of Brookline, N.H.
"The military is treating us like second class citizens. It's sad that
we have to resort to the courts for reimbursement of basic
necessities."

The other plaintiffs in the case are: Sgt. Wayne R. Gutierrez, of New
Bedford, Mass., who served at Camp Edwards; Sgt. Steven M.
Littlefield, of Plymouth, Mass., who served at Camp Edwards until
ordered to Iraq in June 2004; and Joseph P. Murphy, of Derry, N.H., a
specialist at Camp Edwards.

"It defies common sense that these soldiers have been denied their
right to the reimbursement they are due under the law," said Shek, who
praised the plaintiffs for coming forward against their Command.

The suit seeks reimbursement of all per diem expenses, plus damages to
the plaintiffs and the class.