Joseph De Luca v. Robert B. Anderson, Secretary of the Treasury

D.C. Circuit

Joseph De Luca v. Robert B. Anderson, Secretary of the Treasury

293 F.2d 852, 110 U.S. App. D.C. 375, 1961 U.S. App. LEXIS 4269

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedJune 8, 1961

Docket16213

StatusPublished

Cited by29 cases

This text of 293 F.2d 852 (Joseph De Luca v. Robert B. Anderson, Secretary of the Treasury) 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

Joseph De Luca v. Robert B. Anderson, Secretary of the Treasury, 293 F.2d 852, 110 U.S. App. D.C. 375, 1961 U.S. App. LEXIS 4269 (D.C. Cir. 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is a civil service case, in which plaintiff-appellant seeks reinstatement to his former post in the Internal Revenue Service. We have considered the contentions advanced by appellant, but are satisfied he received all the procedural rights accorded him by statute and regulation. We find no error “cognizable within the scope of permissible review,” Hargett v. Summerfield, 100 U.S.App.D.C. 85, 88, 243 F.2d 29, 32, certiorari denied, 353 U.S. 970, 77 S.Ct. 1060, 1 L.Ed. 2d 1137 (1957). The order of the District Court, granting the Government’s motion for summary judgment, will accordingly be

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is a civil service case, in which plaintiff-appellant seeks reinstatement to his former post in the Internal Revenue Service. We have considered the contentions advanced by appellant, but are satisfied he received all the procedural rights accorded him by statute and regulation. We find no error “cognizable within the scope of permissible review,” Hargett v. Summerfield, 100 U.S.App.D.C. 85, 88, 243 F.2d 29, 32, certiorari denied, 353 U.S. 970, 77 S.Ct. 1060, 1 L.Ed. 2d 1137 (1957). The order of the District Court, granting the Government’s motion for summary judgment, will accordingly be

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

293 F.2d 852, 110 U.S. App. D.C. 375, 1961 U.S. App. LEXIS 4269, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/joseph-de-luca-v-robert-b-anderson-secretary-of-the-treasury-cadc-1961.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack