WILLIAM A. YOUNG, APPELLANT,
v.
HARVEY V. HIGLEY, ADMINISTRATOR OF VETERANS' AFFAIRS, PHILIP YOUNG, ET AL., COMMISSIONERS, UNITED STATES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, APPELLEES; ALEXANDER MALCOMSON, JR., APPELLANT, V. HARVEY V. HIGLEY, ADMINISTRATOR OF VETERANS' AFFAIRS, PHILIP YOUNG, ET AL., COMMISSIONERS, UNITED STATES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, APPELLEES

D.C. Cir. | 1955-03-03
Nos. 12324, 12325
220 F.2d 487 United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (1955) Caution
Cited by 18 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellants were removed, in a reduction in force, from employment in the United States Veterans’ Administration. They contend their rights under the Veterans’ Preference Act [of 1944, 5 U.S.C.A. § 851 et seq.] were clearly violated. We do not reach that question.

Appellants failed to exercise, within the time allowed by the rules, their right of appeal to the Civil Service Commission from the decision of its Regional Office upholding the action of the Veterans’ Administration. “The fact that administrative action is probably erroneous does not create an exception to the rule that administrative processes must be exhausted before judicial relief is sought.” Johnson v. Nelson, 86 U.S.App.D.C. 98, 180 F. 2d 386, certiorari denied 339 U.S. 957, 70 S.Ct. 980, 94 L.Ed. 1368. As that case shows, we disagree with the view that administrative remedies need not be exhausted if the administrative action complained of is clearly erroneous. Cf. Wettre v. Hague, 1 Cir., 168 F. 2d 825.

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw