KING v. ERICKSON

Nos. 95-3745, 95-3746.

89 F.3d 1575 (1996)

James B. KING, Director, Office of Personnel Management, Petitioner, v. Lester E. ERICKSON, Jr., Respondent, and Jeanette M. Walsh, Respondent, and Michael G. Barrett and Jerome K. Roberts, Respondents, and Sharon Kye, Respondent, and Merit Systems Protection Board, Respondent.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

July 16, 1996.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Todd M. Hughes, Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., argued, for petitioner. With him on the brief were Frank W. Hunger, Assistant Attorney General, and David M. Cohen, Director. Of counsel was Lorraine Lewis, General Counsel, Steven E. Abow, Joseph E. McCann, and Ana A. Mazzi, Office of General Counsel, Office of Personnel Management, Washington, D.C.

Gail A. Heglund, Best Roberts and Associates, Albuquerque, New Mexico, argued, for respondents Michael G. Barrett and Jerome K. Roberts. With her on the brief was Hannah B. Best.

M. Jefferson Euchler, Neil C. Bonney & Associates, Virginia Beach, Virginia, argued, for respondent Sharon Kye.

Paul E. Marth, Forman, Marth, Black & Angle, P.A., Greensboro, North Carolina, for respondent Lester E. Erickson, Jr.

John R. Koch, Reichert, Wenner, Koch & Provinzino, P.A., St. Cloud, Minnesota, for respondent Jeanette M. Walsh.

Rita S. Arendal, Attorney, Office of General Counsel, U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board, Washington, D.C., for respondent Merit Systems Protection Board. Also for respondent were Mary L. Jennings, General Counsel, and Martha B. Schneider, Assistant General Counsel.

Before RICH, LOURIE, and RADER, Circuit Judges.


LOURIE, Circuit Judge.

The Director of the Office of Personnel Management ("OPM") petitions for review of (1) the final decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board holding that an agency may not charge an employee both with misconduct and with making false statements regarding the alleged misconduct, Walsh v. Department of Veterans Affairs, 62 M.S.P.R. 586 (1994), and (2) the final decisions of the board reversing falsification charges based on its holding...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases