U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 1959

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

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Decided May 21, 1959 · Bazelon, Fahy, Bastían

267 F.2d 689; 105 U.S. App. D.C. 412; 1959 U.S. App. LEXIS 3842 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Mr. David M. Klinedinst, Washington, D. C., for appellant., Mr. Jerome A. Cohen, Asst. U. S. Atty., with whom Messrs. Oliver Gasch, U. S. Atty., and Carl W. Belcher, Asst. U. S. Atty., were on the brief, for appellees. Mr. Harold D. Rhynedance, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., also entered an appearance for appellees.

Cases that cite this one

8 later published cases cite this decision.

Glesby L. Dabney v. Orville Freeman, Secretary of Agriculture of the United States of America (D.C. Cir. 1966)
Haine v. Googe (District Court, S.D. New York 1965)
Thomas v. District of Columbia Department of Labor (D.C. 1979)
Popham v. United States (Court of Claims 1960)
William G. Rich, Jr. v. Honorable James P. Mitchell, Secretary of Labor (D.C. Cir. 1959)
Blackwell v. BD. OF ANIMAL HEALTH (Miss. Ct. App. 2001)
Bohumil J. Dusanek v. Joseph P. Hannon, Raymond C. Principe, John O'donnell, M.D., and the Board of Education of the City of Chicago (7th Cir. 1982)
Glynn H. Goodman v. United States of America (D.C. Cir. 1970)

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

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any further action thereon, and (2) the advice of officials of the employing agency that the charges would not be withdrawn but would remain in her personnel file with her answer thereto.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.

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