Legal Opinion
Lowder v. Department of Homeland Security
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided October 16, 2007No. 2006-3181PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FRIEDMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
The question is whether the appellant James A. Lowder’s service with the United States Secret Service Uniformed Division (“Uniformed Division”) qualifies as “law enforcement officer” service. If so, he would be entitled to the higher retirement benefits that such officers receive. The Merit Systems Protection Board (“Board”) determined, however, that Mr. Lowder’s service did not so qualify, and we affirm.
I
A. Federal “law enforcement officers” may receive more favorable retirement benefits than most federal employees. They may retire earlier, at age 50, after 25…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Hartman v. NicholsonCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2007
- Arthur Bernklau, Claimant-Appellant v. Anthony J. Principi, Secretary of Veterans AffairsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
- David Davis v. Office of Personnel ManagementCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
- Carolina Tobacco Co. v. Bureau of Customs and Border ProtectionCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
- United States v. Juan Raul GarzaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1999
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- In Re EMC CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2012
- Baca v. Department of ArmyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2020
- Innovation Technologies, Inc. v. Splash! Medical Devices, LLC.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
- Baca v. Department of ArmyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2020
- GSC Construction, Inc.Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals · 2020
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.