U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, 1980

Barbara J. deWEEVER-Appellee v. UNITED STATES of America-Appellant

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · Decided March 28, 1980 · Barrett, Doyle, McKAY

618 F.2d 685; 1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 19147; 27 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 32,245; 25 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 1762 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Barbara Allen Babcock, Asst. Atty. Gen., Washington, D. C., Victor R. Ortega, U. S. Atty., Albuquerque, N. M., Robert E. Kopp and Freddi Lipstein, Civ. Div., Dept, of Justice, Washington, D. C., for defendant-appellant., Chris Lucero, Jr., Albuquerque, N. M., for plaintiff-appellee.

Cases that cite this one

6 later published cases cite this decision. The 5 that cite it most often are listed here.

Joan Carol Nagy v. United States Postal Service (11th Cir. 1985)
Cross v. United States Postal Service (8th Cir. 1984)
Milner v. Bolger (United States District Court for the Eastern District of California 1982)
United States v. 319.46 Acres of Land More or Less Situate in Cotton & Jefferson Counties (United States District Court, Oklahoma Western 1981)
Chisholm v. United States Postal Service (District Court, W.D. North Carolina 1980)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

McKAY, Circuit Judge.

The sole issue in this case is whether the trial court properly awarded interest against the United States on a backpay award based on the 1972 Amendments to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16, which brought federal employees within the coverage of Title VII.

It is settled that interest may be assessed against the federal government only pursuant to express statutory or contractual authorization. United States v. Alcea Band of Tiilamooks, 341 U.S. 48, 49, 71 S.Ct. 552, 552, 95 L.Ed. 738 (1951); United States v. Goltra, 312 U.S. 203, 207, 61 S.Ct. 487, 490, 85 L.Ed. 776 (1941); Smyth v. United States, 302 U.S. 329, 353, 58 S.Ct. 248, 252, 82 L.Ed. 294 (1937). The denial of interest absent express authority is based on sovereign immunity. We agree with the First and Third Circuits that Title VII as amended to include federal employees does not provide the necessary express statutory authorization for the award granted by the trial court. Fischer v. Adams, 572 F.2d 406, 411 (1st Cir. 1978); Richerson v. Jones, 551 F.2d 918, 925 (3rd Cir. 1977).

The judgment of the district court is reversed with directions to dismiss the petition for interest on the backpay award.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.