Harold S. MacAulay v. Najeeb e.halaby, Administrator, Federal Aviation Agency

D.C. Circuit

Harold S. MacAulay v. Najeeb e.halaby, Administrator, Federal Aviation Agency

313 F.2d 879, 114 U.S. App. D.C. 198

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedNovember 15, 1962

Docket16923_1

StatusPublished

This text of 313 F.2d 879 (Harold S. MacAulay v. Najeeb e.halaby, Administrator, Federal Aviation Agency) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Harold S. MacAulay v. Najeeb e.halaby, Administrator, Federal Aviation Agency, 313 F.2d 879, 114 U.S. App. D.C. 198 (D.C. Cir. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was separated from his position in the Classified Civil Service by an order effective January 19, 1957. The Civil Service Commission Board of .Appeals and Review affirmed the severance. In the Court of Claims appellant recovered a judgment for his net back pay following the execution of a compromise settlement agreement. Thereafter, appellant filed his action in the District Court seeking reinstatement to the position which had been the subject of the litigation. The court granted the appellee’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the complaint.

We are satisfied that the District Court was right in dismissing the complaint. However the order should have rested on the ground that the appellant had failed to state a claim for which relief might be had.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was separated from his position in the Classified Civil Service by an order effective January 19, 1957. The Civil Service Commission Board of .Appeals and Review affirmed the severance. In the Court of Claims appellant recovered a judgment for his net back pay following the execution of a compromise settlement agreement. Thereafter, appellant filed his action in the District Court seeking reinstatement to the position which had been the subject of the litigation. The court granted the appellee’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the complaint.

We are satisfied that the District Court was right in dismissing the complaint. However the order should have rested on the ground that the appellant had failed to state a claim for which relief might be had.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

313 F.2d 879, 114 U.S. App. D.C. 198, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harold-s-macaulay-v-najeeb-ehalaby-administrator-federal-aviation-cadc-1962.