TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Adele Competello v. Roger W. Jones, Chairman, United States Civil Service Commission

Adele COMPETELLO, Appellant v. Roger W. JONES, Chairman, United States Civil Service Commission, Et Al., Appellees

Adele Competello v. Jones, 267 F.2d 689 (D.C. Cir. 1959)
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
May 21, 1959
Docket
No. 14862_1
Judges
Bazelon, Fahy, Bastían
Citations
267 F.2d 689105 U.S. App. D.C. 4121959 U.S. App. LEXIS 3842

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is from an order of the District Court granting the motion of appellees (members of the United States Civil Service Commission, and the Secretary of the Interior) and dismissing appellant’s complaint for restoration of employment status in the Classified Civil Service.

Briefly these are the pertinent facts. Appellant submitted her resignation following (1) receipt of written notice of a proposal to separate her from the Civil Service but before any further action thereon, and (2) the advice of officials of the employing agency that the charges would not be withdrawn but would remain in her personnel file with her answer thereto. The resignation was accepted. Thereafter appellant received a copy of the Notification of Personnel Action (Standard Form 50) which recorded her resignation and noted that it had been accepted while removal charges were pending but before final decision was reached.

Appellant thereupon requested withdrawal of her resignation on the ground that she would not have resigned had she known that such a notation would appear. The request was denied by the employing agency and appellant sought review by the Civil Service Commission. The Commission held that the resignation was voluntary and hence it had no power to entertain the appeal.

We think the District Court was correct in granting summary judgment for the appellees and in dismissing the suit.

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

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

1959: 11960: 11965: 11966: 11970: 11979: 11982: 12001: 119592026peak 1959 · 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