SMITH

v.

GEORGIA

Citator

Cited By

• Medoff v. Freeman, 362 F.2d 472 (1st Cir. 1966)
  …t employees dismissed from probationary trial employment. Semaan v. Mumford, 1964, 118 U. S.App.D.C. 282, 335 F. 2d 704; Hicks v. Day, 1961, 110 U.S.App.D.C. 121, 289 F. 2d 787; Bander v. United States, 158 F.Supp. 564, 141 Ct.Cl. 373, cert. denied, 358 U.S. 855, 79 S.Ct. 85, 3 L.Ed.2d 89; Nadelhaft v. United States, 1955, 132 Ct. Cl. 316, 131 F.Supp. 930; Kirkpatrick v. Gray, 1952, 91 U.S.App.D.C. 138, 198 F. 2d 533, cert. denied, Priestly v. Donaldson, 344 U.S. 880, 73 S.Ct. 178, 97 L.Ed. 682; Levy v. Woo…
• Seymour Cohen v. The United States, 384 F.2d 1001 (Ct. Cl. 1967)
  …s who have completed their probationary period. The instant plaintiff does not meet this requirement. Hence, the only possible source of rights is in the regulations. See Bander v. United States, 158 F.Supp. 564, 141 Ct.Cl. 373 (1958), cert. denied, 358 U.S. 855, 79 S.Ct. 85, 3 L.Ed.2d 89. The principal question presented by this ease, which is one of first impression, is whether the plaintiff’s separation in March 1963, was “based in whole or in part on conditions arising before his appointment” within th…
• Marcus v. The United States, 473 F.2d 896 (Ct. Cl. 1973)
  …robationary employee were deemed not violated and her dismissal was upheld. The plaintiff invites the court’s attention to the dissenting opinion by Judge Madden in the case of Bander v. United States, 158 F.Supp. 564, 141 Ct.Cl. 373, cert. denied, 358 U.S. 855, 79 S.Ct. 85, 3 L.Ed.2d 89 (1958). Bander had served for ten years with the Commerce Department as an economist or statistician. He left Government service for a period of three years, after which he applied for and obtained a position as letter car…