Legal Opinion
Sullivan v. United States
United States Court of Claims
Decided December 9, 1983No. 93-83CPublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MAYER, Judge.
Plaintiff Sullivan brought suit for severance pay because she was involuntarily separated from a limited term appointment in the federal service. Defendant denies her entitlement because regulations of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) implementing 5 U.S.C. § 5595 prohibit these payments to former federal employees in plaintiff’s circumstance. The case is before the court on defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.
FACTS
Plaintiff was a competitive service federal employee…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Consumer Product Safety Commission v. GTE Sylvania, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Tennessee Valley Authority v. HillSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Morton v. RuizSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Mourning v. Family Publications Service, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms v. Federal Labor Relations AuthoritySupreme Court of the United States · 1983
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Hedman v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1988
- Bell v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1991
- Candace J. Sullivan v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Alexander v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2002
- Santora v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1985
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.