TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Campbell v. Deviny, Public Printer

CAMPBELL v. DEVINY, Public Printer, Et Al.

Campbell v. Deviny, 194 F.2d 881 (D.C. Cir. 1952)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
January 24, 1952
Docket
No. 10147
Judges
Clark, Prettyman, Proctor
Citations
194 F.2d 88190 U.S. App. D.C. 1761952 U.S. App. LEXIS 2857

Opinion — Prettyman

PRETTYMAN, Circuit Judge.

Appellant was employed at the Government Printing Office as an “Estimator-Jacket Preparer”, Grade CAF-7, at an annual salary of $3,000. From January 29, 1943, to January 23, 1946, he was -in the military service, being honorably discharged on the latter date. During his absence there was a reorganization of his Division in the Office. He was returned to duty as an Estimator and Specification Writer, with a salary of $3,640. Subsequent adjustments brought his salary to $4,900 and his designation to “Planner”. He brought a civil action in the District Court, alleging that the position which he had held when he entered military service had, during his absence, been reallocated, 1

and praying for a writ of mandamus to' require the appellee Public Printer and members of the Civil Service Commission to restore him to his former position as thus reallocated. A motion for summary judgment, with supporting affidavits, was filed by the defendants, and a cross-motion for summary judgment upon the question of the court’s jurisdiction, with a supporting affidavit, was filed by Campbell. The District Court rendered judgment for the defendants and dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction, . an opinion being filed by Judge Letts.

2

We agree with that opinion, and upon that basis the judgment will be Affirmed.

1

. Affidavits showed his claim to be that the position as reallocated was a Grade CAF-11 position, salary $3,800. The defendant officials denied that the claimed position was comparable to the position originally held by Campbell.

2

. Campbell v. Deviny, D.C.D.O.1949, 81 P.Supp. 657.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1952: 11957: 11968: 11969: 11994: 119522026peak 1952 · 1

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list