 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Greene v. MSPB, 06-3115,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, May 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petitioner's appeal to Merit Systems Protection Board was filed 12 days beyond the 65-day filing deadline. The Board properly dismissed appeal as untimely, ruling the 65-day time limit was statutory and could not be waived. Even if equitable tolling were applicable, on the facts, petitioner would have no entitlement to file her appeal out of time.
|
|||||
| Griffin v. United States Postal Serv., 06-3103,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, May 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A mail handler failed to show that Merit Systems Protection Board ALJ committed reversible error in upholding USPS's removal decision, arising from his excessive, unexcused absences. The USPS's failure to comply with 5 U.S.C.S. § 7513(b) was harmless procedural error because handler was given 30-days notice and an opportunity to respond to charges.
|
|||||
| Hickok v. United States Postal Serv., 06-3034,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, May 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the employee had not made a nonfrivolous allegation he was absent from his position as a result of a compensable injury, MSPB correctly determined that it did not have jurisdiction, and its decision, dismissing his appeal from the USPS's refusal to restore him to his previous EAS-21 level position, was upheld under 5 U.S.C.S. § 7703(c).
|
|||||
| In re Knearl, MISCELLANEOUS DOCKET NO. 816,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, May 8, 2006, Decided , May 8, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: To the extent that district court ordered the disclosure of information that attorney never communicated to clients, that order was erroneous; it was state of mind of clients, not attorneys, that mattered in a suit alleging willful infringement. However, work product that described communications between attorney and client could be discovered.
|
|||||
| Jentoft v. United States, 05-5125,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, May 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiff, a civilian supervisory test pilot for the Georgia National Guard, was a federal civilian employee and thus had a justiciable claim under the Equal Pay Act, 29 U.S.C.S. § 206(d). There was no language in 10 U.S.C.S. § 10126(a) limiting the circumstances in which a dual status technician could be considered a federal civilian employee.
|
|||||
| Ladiero v. MSPB, 06-3004,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, May 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: MSPB properly dismissed, for lack of jurisdiction, an employee's appeal from the denial of a civil service annuity because there was no final decision under 5 C.F.R. § 831.109(f)(1), absent evidence that he requested reconsideration of the Office of Personnel Management's initial decision, which provided instructions on how to seek reconsideration.
|
|||||
| Lee v. Dep't of the Army, 05-3287,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, May 8, 2006, Decided , May 8, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Marshall v. United States Postal Serv., 2006-3217,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, May 8, 2006, Decided , May 8, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Munson v. DOC, 05-3227,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, May 8, 2006, Decided , May 8, 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. |
