BOEING CO.

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By (16 total)

• DOE v. Hampton, 566 F.2d 265 (D.C. Cir. 1977)
  …for “cause” where its only written evaluation of the employee’s performance is satisfactory. An unsatisfactory performance evaluation is generally not a prerequisite to removal. See Seebach v. Cullen, 338 F. 2d 663, 665 (9th Cir.1964), cert. denied, 380 U.S. 972, 85 S.Ct. 1331, 14 L.Ed.2d 268 (1965); Angrisani v. United States, 172 Ct.Cl. 439 (1965). See also Thomas v. Ward, 96 U.S. App.D.C. 302, 225 F. 2d 953 (1955), cert. denied, 350 U.S. 958, 76 S.Ct. 348, 100 L.Ed. 833 (1956). . See Government’s Brief…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Walker v. Olin G. Blackwell, 360 F.2d 66 (5th Cir. 1966)
  …e plaintiff. The statute confers no jurisdiction on any court [*71] to either direct or influence the exercise of discretion properly vested in any officer or agency of the United States. See-bach v. Cullen, 224 F.Supp. 15, 338 F. 2d 663, cert. den. 380 U.S. 972, 85 S.Ct. 1331, 14 L.Ed.2d 268. The law could not possibly be otherwise, unless the judiciary wishes to take unto itself, in the ultimate, the functions of the Executive Department. In Sostre v. McGinnis, supra, in which the prisoner petitioners we…
• Laurence H. Frommhagen, 456 F.2d 1391 (9th Cir. 1972)
  …determinations is limited to an examination of whether the required procedural steps have been substantially complied with or whether the agency action has been arbitrary or capricious. Seeback v. Cullen, 338 F. 2d 663 (9th Cir. 1964), cert. denied, 380 U.S. 972, 85 S.Ct. 1331, 14 L.Ed.2d 268 (1965). In the present case we must determine what the procedural requirements are in removing an employee from an administrative agency, and in particular whether a discharged employee must be retained and paid pendin…