Legal Opinion
VILEAN STEVENS & IKE PROPHET v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
Decided December 15, 2016No. 14-CV-315PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Thompson, Associate Judge:
Appellants Vilean Stevens and Ike Prophet appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court that affirmed decisions by the District of Columbia Office of Employee Appeals (“OEA”) upholding the abolishment, through a reduction-in-force (“RIF”), of positions that appellants held at appellee District of Columbia Department of Health (“DOH” or the “Agency”). For the reasons that follow, we agree with the OEA -(and with the Superior Court) that the RIF was governed by the Abolishment Act, D.C. Code § 1-624.08 (2006 Repl.) (sometimes hereafter referred to as the “Act”), rather…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Morton v. MancariSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- M. A. P. v. RyanDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1971
- Corley v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Peoples Drug Stores, Inc. v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1983
- A. Ernest Fitzgerald v. Robert E. Hampton, Chairman of United States Civil Service CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1972
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Malik Ferguson v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2017
- Karleane Johnson v. District of Columbia Department of HealthDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2017
- Andrew Johnson v. District of Columbia Public SchoolsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2018
- Cofield v. District of Columbia Office of Employee AppealsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2023
- DC Appleseed Center for Law and Justice, Inc. v. DC Department of Insurance, Securities, and BankingDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2019
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.