DiMattia

Court of Claims

DiMattia

202 Ct. Cl. 1116, 1973 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 129, 1973 WL 5035

CourtUnited States Court of Claims

DecidedSeptember 12, 1973

DocketNo. 186-72

StatusPublished

This text of 202 Ct. Cl. 1116 (DiMattia) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Court of Claims primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

DiMattia, 202 Ct. Cl. 1116, 1973 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 129, 1973 WL 5035 (cc 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Civilian fay; fail/are to exhaust administrative remedies; untimely appeal. — Plaintiff alleges that defendant improperly refused to allow him to withdraw a resignation submitted on January 9,1968 and misled him into believing the adverse action would not be reflected in his personnel file. Plaintiff’s appeal to the Civil Service Commission, dated April 10,1970 was denied as untimely; the CSC Board of Appeals and Eeview affirmed the decision. This case came before the court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Upon consideration thereof, without oral argument, the court concluded that plaintiff failed to timely exhaust his administrative remedy. See Gernand v. United States, 174 Ct. Cl. 936, 939-40 (1966), modified on other grounds, 188 Ct. Cl. 544, 412 F.2d 1190 (1969). On September 12, 1973, by order, the court granted defendant’s motion and dismissed the petition. Plaintiff’s motion for rehearing was denied November 14, 1973.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Civilian fay; fail/are to exhaust administrative remedies; untimely appeal. — Plaintiff alleges that defendant improperly refused to allow him to withdraw a resignation submitted on January 9,1968 and misled him into believing the adverse action would not be reflected in his personnel file. Plaintiff’s appeal to the Civil Service Commission, dated April 10,1970 was denied as untimely; the CSC Board of Appeals and Eeview affirmed the decision. This case came before the court on defendant’s motion for summary judgment. Upon consideration thereof, without oral argument, the court concluded that plaintiff failed to timely exhaust his administrative remedy. See Gernand v. United States, 174 Ct. Cl. 936, 939-40 (1966), modified on other grounds, 188 Ct. Cl. 544, 412 F.2d 1190 (1969). On September 12, 1973, by order, the court granted defendant’s motion and dismissed the petition. Plaintiff’s motion for rehearing was denied November 14, 1973.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

202 Ct. Cl. 1116, 1973 U.S. Ct. Cl. LEXIS 129, 1973 WL 5035, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dimattia-cc-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack