Legal Opinion
LaChance v. Erickson
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided January 21, 1998No. 96-1395PublishedCited by 189 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Rehnquist
The question presented by this action is whether either the Due Process Clause or the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (CSRA), 5 U. S. C. § 1101 et seq., precludes a federal agency from sanctioning an employee for making false statements to the agency regarding alleged employment-related misconduct on the part of the employee. We hold that they do not.
Respondents Walsh, Erickson, Kye, Barrett, Roberts, and McManus are Government employees who were the subject of adverse actions by the various agencies for which they worked. Each employee made false statements to agency investigators with…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Cleveland Board of Education v. LoudermillSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Baxter v. PalmigianoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- United States v. DunniganSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Hale v. HenkelSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Dennis v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by189 opinions
- Stevenson v. CarrollCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2007
- Mark Abbott v. Laurie J. Latshaw, Albert Diehl, Dennis George, Robert Stafford and Donald SarsfieldCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1998
- United States v. VealCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1998
- Joshua v. City of GainesvilleSupreme Court of Florida · 2000
- Ex Parte GeikenCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2000
184 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.