 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Bradley v. VA, 05-3379,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, April 5, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Charged misconduct occurred, there was a nexus between it and the objective of promoting efficiency of the service, and penalty of removal was appropriate, especially in view of employee's prior history, her threat of violence, and her continued absences. MSPB's decision affirming VA's decision to remove her was affirmed under 5 U.S.C.S. § 7703(c).
|
|||||
| Hill v. United States, 2006-5063,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, April 5, 2006, Decided , April 5, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Lusk v. Nicholson, 05-7185,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, April 5, 2006, Decided , April 5, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Mayfield v. Nicholson, 05-7157,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, April 5, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court of appeals reversed the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims' order upholding a decision by the Board of Veterans Appeals (BVA), which found that a VA regional office complied with its obligation under the VCAA, because the court of appeals for veterans claims relied on a document the BVA had not considered.
|
|||||
| Petersen v. OPM, 06-3011,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, April 5, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Decision of the Office of Personnel Management, affirmed by the Merit Systems Protection Board, was affirmed because the former wife was entitled to receive COLA adjustments pursuant to 5 C.F.R. § 838.1017 because the 1983 divorce decree did not specifically indicate that the wife was not to receive the COLA adjustments.
|
|||||
| Washington v. United States, 06-5031,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, April 5, 2006, Decided , April 5, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
