Terry v. Stevens

D.C. Circuit

Terry v. Stevens

203 F.2d 219, 92 U.S. App. D.C. 212, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 3360

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedApril 16, 1953

Docket11474

StatusPublished

This text of 203 F.2d 219 (Terry v. Stevens) 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

Terry v. Stevens, 203 F.2d 219, 92 U.S. App. D.C. 212, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 3360 (D.C. Cir. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is from a summary judgment for the defendant (appellee) in an action whereby Miss Terry (appellant) sought an order (1) declaring removal from her civil service position to he invalid and (2) restoring her to said position. She complains that proceedings resulting in her removal violated the Act of August 24, 1912, c. 389, § 6, 37 Stat. 555, as amended June 10, 1948, c. 447, § 6(a), 62 Stat. 354, 5 U.S. C.A. § 652, and U. S. Civil Service Commission Regulations § 9.102, 5 C.F.R. § 9.102 (1949 ed.), for failure to charge a removable cause and for insufficiency and uncertainty in the proceedings in form and substance to meet requirements of the law.

Examination of the record of the removal proceedings leads us to agree with the trial judge that there was substantial compliance with the applicable law. Accordingly the judgment is

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is from a summary judgment for the defendant (appellee) in an action whereby Miss Terry (appellant) sought an order (1) declaring removal from her civil service position to he invalid and (2) restoring her to said position. She complains that proceedings resulting in her removal violated the Act of August 24, 1912, c. 389, § 6, 37 Stat. 555, as amended June 10, 1948, c. 447, § 6(a), 62 Stat. 354, 5 U.S. C.A. § 652, and U. S. Civil Service Commission Regulations § 9.102, 5 C.F.R. § 9.102 (1949 ed.), for failure to charge a removable cause and for insufficiency and uncertainty in the proceedings in form and substance to meet requirements of the law.

Examination of the record of the removal proceedings leads us to agree with the trial judge that there was substantial compliance with the applicable law. Accordingly the judgment is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

203 F.2d 219, 92 U.S. App. D.C. 212, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 3360, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/terry-v-stevens-cadc-1953.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack