Hazel T. Ellis v. Frederick H. Mueller, Acting Sec'y of Com., 280 F.2d 722 (D.C. Cir. 1960). · Go Syfert
Search
Hazel T. Ellis v. Frederick H. Mueller, Acting Sec'y of Com., 280 F.2d 722 (D.C. Cir. 1960). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
33 citation events across 8 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Conrad C. Eustace v. J. Edward Day, Postmaster General (cadc, 1962-12-20)
Treatment trajectory · 1961 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1961 1993 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Conrad C. Eustace v. J. Edward Day, Postmaster General (2×)
D.C. Cir. · 1962 · signal: see · confidence high
See Ellis v. Mueller, 108 U.S.App.D.C. 174 , 280 F.2d 722 , cert. denied, 364 U.S. 883 , 81 S.Ct. 172 , 5 L.Ed.2d 104 (1960); Hargett v. Summerfield, 100 U.S.App.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Hazel T. ELLIS, Appellant,
v.
Frederick H. MUELLER, Acting Secretary of Commerce, Et Al., Appellees
15599_1.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
Jun 23, 1960.
280 F.2d 722
Mr. Claude L. Dawson, Washington, D. C., for appellant., Mr. Anthony F. Cafferky, Atty., Dept, of Justice, with whom Mr. Kevin T. Maroney, Atty., Dept, of Justice, was on the brief, for appellees.
Washington, Danaher, Bastían.
Cited by 13 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

This is a civil service case, in which plaintiff-appellant’s dismissal was the subject of an extensive hearing before the Civil Service Commission under the Veterans’ Preference Act of 1944, 5 U.S.C.A. § 863, and was upheld by that body. Suit for a declaratory judgment and restoration of status was thereafter brought in the District Court. That court granted the appellees’ (defendants’) motion for summary judgment.

The function of the courts in cases like this is not to review the merits of a dismissal, but to determine whether the employee was accorded his statutory and procedural rights. See Hargett v. Sum-merfield, 1957, 100 U.S.App.D.C. 85, 243 F.2d 29. Such rights were fully accorded here.

Affirmed.