Stand. Oil Div., Am. Oil Co. v. John Starks, Jr., & United States Postal Serv., Emp.-Appellee. Chicago Hous. Auth. v. Mrs. Johnnie B. Jones, & United States Postal Serv., Emp.-Appellee. First Fin. Co. v. David C. Deininger, & United States Postal Serv., Emp.-Appellee, 528 F.2d 201 (1st Cir. 1976). · Go Syfert
Stand. Oil Div., Am. Oil Co. v. John Starks, Jr., & United States Postal Serv., Emp.-Appellee. Chicago Hous. Auth. v. Mrs. Johnnie B. Jones, & United States Postal Serv., Emp.-Appellee. First Fin. Co. v. David C. Deininger, & United States Postal Serv., Emp.-Appellee, 528 F.2d 201 (1st Cir. 1976). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
77 citation events (11 in the last 25 years) across 24 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Greg Adkisson v. Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc (ca6, 2022-06-13)
Treatment trajectory · 1976 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1976 2001 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 24 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited as authority (rule) Greg Adkisson v. Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc
6th Cir. · 2022 · confidence medium
Oil Co. v. Starks, 528 F.2d 201, 204 (7th Cir. 1975); and then Goodman’s Furniture Co. v. U.S. Postal Serv., 561 F.2d 462, 464 (3d Cir. 1977)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Greg Adkisson v. Jacobs Eng'g Group, Inc
6th Cir. · 2022 · confidence medium
Oil Co. v. No. 21-5801 Adkisson et al. v. Jacobs Eng’g Group, Inc Page 20 Starks, 528 F.2d 201, 204 (7th Cir. 1975); and then Goodman’s Furniture Co. v. U.S. Postal Serv., 561 F.2d 462, 464 (3d Cir. 1977)).
examined Cited as authority (rule) Alabama One Credit Union v. Toppins (3×) also: Cited "see"
N.D. Ala. · 2020 · confidence medium
Oil Co. v. Starks, 528 F.2d 201, 204 (7th Cir. 1975) (reversing district court’s grant of sovereign immunity to United States Postal Service because Postal Service had not made “clear showing” that suits at issue would impose grave interference with the Postal Service’s functions); see also Goodman’s Furniture Co. v. U.S. Postal Serv., 561 F.2d 462 , 464–65 (3d Cir. 1977) (agreeing with analysis and reasoning in Standard Oil and May Department Stores and similarly concluding that the Postal Service was not immune from garnishment proceedings).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Banks v. Merit Systems Protection Board
Fed. Cir. · 2017 · confidence medium
Oil Co. v. Starks, 528 F.2d 201, 202 (7th Cir. 1975).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Baker v. Runyon
7th Cir. · 1997 · confidence medium
Congress may have vested the Postal Service with significant powers in order to increase its independence and autonomy, see Standard Oil, 528 F.2d at 202-03 (listing powers granted to Postal Service), but it also provided that the Postal Service is part of the executive branch of government, that its employees are part of the federal civil service, and that it possesses certain powers unique to governmental entities, such as the authority to exercise the power of eminent domain in the name of the United States.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) 74 Fair empl.prac.cas. (Bna) 160, 70 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 44,760 Mitzi Baker, Plaintiff-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Marvin T. Runyon, Postmaster General of the United States, Defendant-Appellant/cross-Appellee
7th Cir. · 1997 · confidence medium
Congress may have vested the Postal Service with significant powers in order to increase its independence and autonomy, see Standard Oil, 528 F.2d at 202-03 (listing powers granted to Postal Service), but it also provided that the Postal Service is part of the executive branch of government, that its employees are part of the federal civil service, and that it possesses certain powers unique to governmental entities, such as the authority to exercise the power of eminent domain in the name of the United States.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) 34 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1447, 35 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1520, 34 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 34,379, 35 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 34,754 Rebecca Mae Cross v. United States Postal Service the Board of Governors of the United States Postal Service M.A. Wright R.E. Holding Charles H. Codding William A. Irvine Crocker Nevin Hayes Robertson and Benjamin F. Bailar
8th Cir. · 1984 · confidence medium
I do not believe that this inference is compelled. 19 First, "[i]n addition to the power to sue and be sued, Congress has assigned a superabundance of power to USPS in making it an 'independent establishment,' operating in a 'business-like' way to make delivery of the mail 'a self-supporting enterprise.' " Standard Oil Division, American Oil Co. v. Starks, 528 F.2d 201, 203 (7th Cir.1975) (per curiam).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Cross v. United States Postal Service
8th Cir. · 1984 · confidence medium
First, “[i]n addition to the power to sue and be sued, Congress has assigned a superabundance of power to USPS in making it an ‘independent establishment,’ operating in a ‘business-like’ way to make delivery of the mail ‘a self-supporting enterprise.’ ” Standard Oil Division, American Oil Co. v. Starks, 528 F.2d 201, 203 (7th Cir.1975) (per curiam).
cited Cited as authority (rule) O'Connell MacHinery Co., Inc. v. MV AMERICANA
S.D.N.Y. · 1983 · confidence medium
Id. at 202.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Employment Development Department v. United States Postal Service, Franchise Tax Board v. United States Postal Service (2×)
9th Cir. · 1983 · confidence medium
The Postal Service has been “launched into the commercial world.” See FHA v. Burr, 309 U.S. 242, 245 , 60 S.Ct. 488, 490 , 84 L.Ed. 724 (1940); May Department Stores Co. v. Williamson, 549 F.2d 1147, 1148 (8th Cir.1977); Standard Oil Division, American Oil Co. v. Starks, 528 F.2d 201, 202-3 (7th Cir.1975).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Peoples Gas, Light And Coke Company v. United States Postal Service
7th Cir. · 1981 · confidence medium
Standard Oil Div., American Oil Co. v. Starks, 528 F.2d 201, 202 (7th Cir. 1975), citing Beneficial Finance Co. of New York, Inc. v. Dallas, 571 F.2d 125, 128 (2d Cir. 1978).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Peoples Gas, Light & Coke Co. v. United States Postal Service
7th Cir. · 1981 · confidence medium
Standard Oil Div., American Oil Co. v. Starks, 528 F.2d 201, 202 (7th Cir. 1975), citing Beneficial Finance Co. of New York, Inc. v. Dallas, 571 F.2d 125, 128 (2d Cir. 1978).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Sportique Fashions, Inc. v. William Sullivan
9th Cir. · 1979 · confidence medium
Thus, while the "sue and be sued" clause may now permit suits against the Postal Service that were prohibited against its predecessor, such as garnishment proceedings, See Beneficial Finance v. Dallas, 571 F.2d 125, 128 (2d Cir. 1978); May Department Stores Co. v. Williamson, 549 F.2d 1147, 1148 (8th Cir. 1977); Standard Oil Division v. Starks, 528 F.2d 201, 204 (7th Cir. 1975), § 2680(b) remains as one of the limitations to consent to suit which Congress specifically retained for the Postal Service.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Sportique Fashions, Inc. v. Sullivan
9th Cir. · 1979 · confidence medium
Thus, while the “sue and be sued” clause may now permit suits against the Postal Service that were prohibited against its predecessor, such as garnishment proceedings, see Beneficial Finance v. Dallas, 571 F.2d 125, 128 (2d Cir. 1978); May Department Stores Co. v. Williamson, 549 F.2d 1147, 1148 (8th Cir. 1977); Standard Oil Division v. Starks, 528 F.2d 201, 204 (7th Cir. 1975), § 2680(b) remains as one of the limitations to consent to suit which Congress specifically retained for the Postal Service.
examined Cited as authority (rule) Beneficial Finance Co. Of New York, Inc. v. Ronald Dallas and Mary E. Dallas, and United States Postal Service (3×) also: Cited "see"
2d Cir. · 1978 · confidence medium
Standard Oil Division, American Oil Co. v. Starks, supra, at 204.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Kann Corp. v. Monroe (2×) also: Cited "see"
D.D.C. · 1977 · confidence medium
Oil Co. v. Starks, 528 F.2d 201, 202 (7th Cir. 1975). 1 A federal district court held likewise in another reported decision.
examined Cited as authority (rule) United Virginia Bank/National v. Eaves (3×) also: Cited "see"
E.D. Va. · 1976 · confidence medium
For a delineation of the varied tasks and endeavors of the Postal Service, see Standard Oil Division, American Oil Company v. Starks, 528 F.2d 201, 204 (7th Cir. 1975). 4 .
discussed Cited "see" Michele Portmann, Doing Business as Grafica, an Individual v. United States (2×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
7th Cir. · 1982 · signal: see · confidence high
See Standard Oil Div., American Oil Co. v. Starks, 528 F.2d 201, 203 (7th Cir. 1975); 39 U.S.C. §§ 2003-2009 (1976).
cited Cited "see" Pearlstine v. United States
E.D. Pa. · 1979 · signal: see · confidence high
See Standard Oil Division, American Oil Co. v. Starks, 528 F.2d 201 (7th Cir. 1975); Grasso v. United States Postal Service, 438 F.Supp. 1231 (D.Conn.1977).
cited Cited "see" Lincoln National Bank & Trust Co. v. Marotta
N.D.N.Y. · 1977 · signal: see · confidence high
See Standard Oil Div., American Oil Co. v. Starks, supra; see 39 U.S.C. §§ 101 , 201, and 401; 1970 United States Code Congressional & Administrative News pp. 3649 et seq.
cited Cited "see" Bank of Virginia v. Tompkins
E.D. Va. · 1977 · signal: see · confidence high
See Standard Oil Division, American Oil Co. v. Starks, supra, 528 F.2d at 204 ; United Virginia Bank/National v. Eaves, supra, 416 F.Supp. at 521-522 .
discussed Cited "see" Iowa-Des Moines National Bank v. United States
S.D. Iowa · 1976 · signal: see · confidence high
The only statutory exceptions to the Service’s consent to be sued appear to involve matters within the scope of the Federal Tort Claims Act and in regard to procedural rules applicable to suits against the United States. 39 U.S.C.A. § 409 ; See Standard Oil, supra, at 203; White v. Bloomberg, 501 F.2d 1379, 1386 (4th Cir. 1974).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Milner v. Bolger
E.D. Cal. · 1982 · signal: compare · confidence low
Compare, Associates Financial Services of America, Inc. v. Robinson, 582 F.2d 1 (5th Cir. 1978), Beneficial Finance Co. v. Dallas, 571 F.2d 125 (2nd Cir. 1978), General Electric Credit Corp. v. Smith, 565 F.2d 291 (4th Cir. 1977), Goodman’s Furniture Co. v. United States Postal Service, 561 F.2d 462 (3rd Cir. 1977), May Department Stores Co. v. Williamson, 549 F.2d 1147 (8th Cir. 1977), Standard Oil Division, American Oil Co. v. Starks, 528 F.2d 201 (7th Cir. 1976), Lincoln National Bank v. Marotta, 442 F.2d 49 (N.D.N.Y.1977), Bank of Virginia v. Tompkins, 434 F.Supp. 787 (E.D.
cited Cited "see, e.g." Exchange National Bank v. Daniel Hale Williams University
N.D. Ill. · 1979 · signal: see also · confidence low
F. C. v. Menihan Corp., 312 U.S. 81 , 61 S.Ct. 485 , 85 L.Ed. 595 (1941); see also Standard Oil Div., American Oil Co. v. Starks, 528 F.2d 201 (7th Cir. 1975).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Standard Oil Division, American Oil Company
v.
John Starks, Jr., and United States Postal Service, Employer-Appellee. Chicago Housing Authority v. Mrs. Johnnie B. Jones, and United States Postal Service, Employer-Appellee. First Finance Company v. David C. Deininger, and United States Postal Service, Employer-Appellee
75--1608.
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.
Feb 10, 1976.
528 F.2d 201
Published

528 F.2d 201

38 A.L.R.Fed. 540

STANDARD OIL DIVISION, AMERICAN OIL COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
John STARKS, Jr., Defendant-Appellee,
and
United States Postal Service, Employer-Appellee.
CHICAGO HOUSING AUTHORITY, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Mrs. Johnnie B. JONES, Defendant-Appellee,
and
United States Postal Service, Employer-Appellee.
FIRST FINANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
David C. DEININGER, Defendant-Appellee,
and
United States Postal Service, Employer-Appellee.

Nos. 75--1608, 75--1609, 75--1690.

United States Court of Appeals,
Seventh Circuit.

Argued Oct. 20, 1975.
Decided Dec. 24, 1975.
Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc
Denied Feb. 10, 1976.

Harold L. Wagman, M. C. Elden, Chicago, Ill., for plaintiffs-appellants.

Samuel K. Skinner, U.S. Atty., Martin B. Lowery, Asst. U.S. Atty., Chicago, Ill., for appellees.

Before CLARK, Associate Judge,[*] CASTLE, Senior Circuit Judge, and SWYCERT, Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM.

[*~201]1

These appeals challenge the immunity of the United States Postal Service (USPS) to garnishment procedures to effect judgments in state courts. The Government says:

2

'The United States Postal Service, being an independent establishment of the executive branch and performing a function which only the federal government may perform or delegate is not subject to a garnishment proceedings.'The Government cites as authority for its proposition only two cases, Lawhorn v. Lawhorn, 351 F.Supp. 1399 (S.D.W.Va.1972), and Detroit Window Cleaners Local 139 Insurance Fund v. Griffin et al., 345 F.Supp. 1343 (E.D.Mich.1972). The District Court here followed these cases and quashed the garnishment summons in each case. We find this error and reverse.

I.

3

The trilogy of Supreme Court opinions in Keifer & Keifer v. R.F.C., 306 U.S. 381, 59 S.Ct. 516, 83 L.Ed. 784 (1939); F.H.A. v. Burr, 309 U.S. 242, 60 S.Ct. 488, 84 L.Ed. 724 (1940), and R.F.C. v. Menihan Corp., 312 U.S. 81, 61 S.Ct. 485, 85 L.Ed. 595 (1941), control the outcome in this case. In Keifer, the Court laid down the rule that 'the government does not become the conduit of its immunity in suits against its agents or instrumentalities merely because they do its work.' Keifer, supra, 306 U.S. at 388, 59 S.Ct. at 517. In F.H.A. v. Burr, supra, first the Court announced the Keifer principle that waivers by Congress of governmental immunity from suit should be liberally construed in the case of federal instrumentalities. Then the Court continued that, in the absence of a contrary showing, '(I)t must be presumed that when Congress launched a governmental agency into the commercial world and endowed it with authority to 'sue and be sued,' that agency is not less amenable to judicial process than a private enterprise under the circumstances would be.' Id. 309 U.S. at 245, 60 S.Ct. at 490. Finally, in R.F.C. v. Menihan Corp., supra, the Court applied 'the principle that there is no presumption that the agent is clothed with sovereign immunity.' Id. 312 U.S. at 85, 61 S.Ct. at 487. The Court then looked at the statute creating the R.F.C. and previous cases construing its language, and announced: 'We apply the farther (sic) principle that the words 'sue and be sued' normally include the natural and appropriate incidents of legal proceedings.' Id.

4

In each of these three cases, the Supreme Court determined that Congress could by the laws creating independent agencies also waive whatever claim those agencies might make to the sovereign immunity enjoyed by the United States Government. The significant turning point for this case was reached when the Congress transformed the United States Post Office into the United States Postal Service.

5

Indeed, in enacting the Postal Reorganization Act, Pub.L. 91--375, the Congress specifically declared its purpose to be to authorize the operation of the postal service in 'a business-like way,' 1970 U.S.Code Cong. & Admin.News, pp. 3649, 3660. It wished to make the delivery of the mail a self-supporting enterprise. 39 U.S.C. § 2401. To this end it removed the USPS from the political arena by placing it under a Board of Governors appointed by the President. 39 U.S.C. §§ 202--05. This Board--rather than the President--would select the Postmaster General and also hold the sole power to remove him; his Deputy would be selected by the Board and the Postmaster General and serve at their pleasure. The Act also confers on the United States District Court original but not exclusive jurisdiction 'over all actions brought by or against the Postal Service' with all of the procedures of Title 28 being made applicable. 39 U.S.C. § 409(a). Additionally, the USPS is given authority, with the prior consent of the Attorney General, to employ its own attorneys. 39 U.S.C. § 409(d). Finally, the Act has a sweep-provision that, outside of certain enumerated exceptions, 'no Federal Law dealing with public or Federal contracts, property, works, officers, employees, budgets, or funds . . . shall apply to the exercise of the powers of the Postal Service.' 39 U.S.C. § 410.

6

The powers granted to the USPS are also important to our consideration of the effect of Congress' transfer of functions from the Post Office to the USPS. Not only was the USPS made 'an independent establishment of the executive branch of the Government of the United States,' 39 U.S.C. § 201 (emphasis supplied), the USPS was also granted by the Congress wide and distinct powers separate from that Government. The most significant of those powers for the analysis of this case is the USPS power to 'sue or be sued in its official name.' 39 U.S.C. § 401(1). It is the extent of that grant that is the disputed issue of this case.

[*~202]7

Beyond that significant power, however, there are still other powers that the Congress granted to the USPS which underscore the independence that the transformed postal agency was to possess. It was empowered to enter into contracts and execute instruments; to keep its own accounts; to acquire, hold, maintain, sell and lease real and personal property; to construct, lease, and maintain buildings, facilities, equipment, etc.; to accept gifts and donations of services; to settle claims by or against it. 39 U.S.C. §§ 401(3)--(9). Under the reorganization, the USPS was granted broad powers regarding employment and transportation matters. 39 U.S.C. §§ 1001 et seq. and § 5001 et seq. By the creation of a special Postal Service Fund, a revolving fund in the Treasury of the United States, and the broad grant of financing powers, the Congress put the USPS on an independent financial basis, with only transitionary appropriations to be under the annual budget of the United States. The USPS was to exercise and 'to have all other powers incidental, necessary, or appropriate to the carrying on of its functions or the exercise of its specific powers.' 39 U.S.C. § 401(10). Altogether, these powers emphasize the autonomy that the USPS was to enjoy.

II.

8

It appears to us that Congress has not only continued the 'emphatic practice' mentioned in Keifer of disallowing governmental immunity for federal agencies, but in the case of USPS has made it even less hospitable. In addition to the power to sue and be sued, Congress has assigned a superabundance of power to USPS in making it an 'independent establishment,' operating in a 'business-like' way to make the delivery of the mail 'a self-supporting enterprise.' Congress knows well enough how to draw such statutes. In addition to the forty cited in Keifer, supra, 306 U.S. at 390--91, n. 3, 59 S.Ct. 516, there have been five statutes of that type enacted: 15 U.S.C. § 634(b)(1); 38 U.S.C. § 1820(a)(1); 12 U.S.C. § 181(a); 12 U.S.C. § 341;20 U.S.C. § 1132C--2(b)(2); 35 U.S.C. § 1154. Moreover, in the Act here, the Congress specifically restricted the consent to suit in two respects only: (1) the applicability of the Federal Tort Claims Act and (2) procedural matters relating to suits against the United States. 39 U.S.C. § 409. These specific and isolated limitations indicate beyond doubt that the waiver to sue and be sued applied to all other litigation. See KSK Jewelry Co. v. Chicago Sheraton Corp., 283 F.2d 8, 11 (7th Cir. 1960); White v. Bloomberg, 501 F.2d 1379, 1386 (4th Cir. 1974); Sutherland, Statutory Construction § 47.23. Since both Burr and Menihan involved garnishments and are both prior in time of the Postal Reorganization Act, it is reasonable to assume that the Congress intended that the 'sue and be sued' clause embraced garnishment proceedings against the USPS.

9

We also note that the widespread dissatisfaction with the doctrine of sovereign immunity has continued unabated. Byse, Proposed Reforms in Federal Non-statutory Judicial Review: Sovereign Immunity, Indispensable Parties, Mandamus, 75 Harv.L.Rev. 1479 (1962); 3 K. C. Davis, Administrative Law Treatise, ch. 27 (1958, Supp.1965); L. Jaffe, Judicial Control of Administrative Action, 197--98, 213--31, 299 n. 123 (1965); Carrow, Sovereign Immunity in Administrative Law--a New Diagnosis, 9 J.Pub.Law 1, 22 (1960); Crampton, Non-statutory Review of Federal Administrative Action: The Need for Statutory Reform of Sovereign Immunity, Subject Matter Jurisdiction, and Parties Defendant, 68 Mich. L.Rev. 387 (1970); Currie, The Federal Courts and The American Law Institute, (Part II), 36 U.Chi.L.Rev. 268, 290 (1969); K. C. Davis, Administrative Law Text § 27.07 at 497 (3d ed.1972). In the face of the 'sue and be sued' provisions of the Act, no arguments have been made by any persuasive authority to support the maintenance of sovereign immunity in these garnishment proceedings.

III

10

It is insisted that USPS is immune from suit because it has not been 'launched into the commercial world,' in the sense of the Supreme Court holding in Burr, supra, and because it has been assigned an exclusively governmental function. This is wrong, however, both as a matter of law as well as of fact. Keifer, supra, teaches us that a government agency does not acquire the government's immunity merely because it does government work. Factually USPS operations cannot be described as 'exclusively' governmental. Indeed most of its work is not governmental in nature. The powers that are set out in § 401 and outlined above in Part II of this opinion are powers that are common to any business organization. The delivery of mail itself is not inherently an operation that must be government-operated and in fact is not exclusively so operated today. The United States Parcel Service is but one example of a private mail delivery system; in addition, Consumer Services Cooperation in Ohio, Private Postal System of America in Florida, and American Postal Corporation on the West Coast all are presently delivering third and fourth class mail. The Western Union has its mailograms, and there are hundreds of subcontractors working for the USPS itself.

11

The appellee asserted, and the District Court agreed, that to subject the Postal Service to garnishment proceedings for the possible debts of 750,000 employees would be to impose a 'grave interference with U.S. Postal Service's functions.' Yet there has been no 'clear showing' of interference. We cannot on the mere assertions made here imply that Congress did not intend the full consequences of what it said. F.H.A. v. Burr, supra, 309 U.S. at 249, 60 S.Ct. 488. There is no basis in law or policy for blocking these garnishment proceedings.

[*~203]12

Reversed.

*

Associate Justice Tom C. Clark, United States Supreme Court (Ret.) is sitting by designation