green
Positive treatment
27.7 score
Treatment trajectory · 1990 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1990
2008
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 31 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Joseph Price v. Department of Veterans Affairs
IAF, Tab 1 at 6; see Melnick v. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97 (1989) (finding that pro se appellants are not required to plead the issues with the 8 precision required of an attorney in a judicial proceeding), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
discussed
Cited "see"
Frank L Ford v. Department of Commerce
See 5 C.F.R. § 1201.41 (b)(8), (10) (reflecting the authority of the administrative judge to rule on witness lists and order the production of witnesses whose testimony would be relevant, material, and nonrepetitious). 5 administrative judge is expected to interpret pleadings liberally, and that parties without the benefits of legal counsel are not required to plead the issues with the precision of an attorney), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
discussed
Cited "see"
Jenna Grace v. Department of the Navy
See Melnick v. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97 (1989) (finding that pro se appellants are not required to plead the issues with the precision required of an attorney in a judicial proceeding), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
cited
Cited "see"
Wayne Smith v. Department of Energy
See Melnick v. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97 (1989) (holding that pro se pleadings are to be liberally construed), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 3 (Fed.
cited
Cited "see"
David Hendy v. Department of Veterans Affairs
See Melnick v. Department of Housing & Urban Development , 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97-98 (1989), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
cited
Cited "see"
Daniel Gonzalez v. Department of Agriculture
See Melnick v. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97 (1989) (stating that a pro se appellant’s pleadings are to be liberally construed), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
discussed
Cited "see"
Stacey Morton v. Department of Agriculture
See Melnick v. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 101-02 (1989) (finding a 30-day PIP period sufficient in length to demonstrate acceptable performance), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
discussed
Cited "see"
Kenneita Landry v. Social Security Administration
IAF, Tab 9, Initial Decision (ID) at 10 n.6; see Davis v. Department of Defense, 105 M.S.P.R. 2 Given the appellant’s pro se status, we liberally interpret her petition for review by assuming that she means the agency’s pre-employment screening process when she refers to a “security clearance.” PFR File, Tab 1 at 4; see Melnick v. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97-98 (1989) (observing that the pleadings of pro se parties should be interpreted liberally), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
cited
Cited "see"
Marjorie Petrucelli v. Department of Veterans Affairs
See Melnick v. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97 (1989) (stating that pro se pleadings are to be liberally construed), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
discussed
Cited "see"
David McCauley v. Department of Veterans Affairs
See Melnick v. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97-98 (1989) (observing that parties without legal representation are not required to plead issues with precision and are entitled to a liberal interpretation of their allegations), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
cited
Cited "see"
Debra Drake v. Department of the Interior
See Melnick v. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 101 (1989), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
discussed
Cited "see"
Da Vida v. Anderson v. Department of the Air Force
See Melnick v. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 96, 101 (1989) (finding that a 30‑day PIP satisfied an agency’s obligation to provide a GS-5 Secretary with a reasonable opportunity to demonstrate acceptable performance), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
cited
Cited "see"
Douglas Marrisette v. Department of Veterans Affairs
See Melnick v. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97-98 (1989) (liberally construing a pro se appellant’s pleadings), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
discussed
Cited "see"
Steven A. Miller v. United States Postal Service
Id. at 1 ; see Melnick v. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97-98 (1989) (observing that parties before the Board, particularly those without the benefit of legal counsel, are not required to plead the issues with the precision required of an attorney in a judicial proceeding), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
cited
Cited "see"
Lance McDermott v. United States Postal Service
See Melnick v. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97 (1989) (discussing that a pro se appellant’s pleadings are to be liberally construed), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
cited
Cited "see"
Lance McDermott v. United States Postal Service
See Melnick v. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97 (1989) (discussing that a pro se appellant’s pleadings are to be liberally construed), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
cited
Cited "see"
Valerie Ann Thompson v. Department of the Army
See Melnick v. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 101 (1989), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
cited
Cited "see"
Richard Zakosky v. Department of Veterans Affairs
See Melnick v. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97-98 (1989), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
cited
Cited "see"
Kashif A. Rasheed v. Department of Transportation
See Melnick v. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97 (1989) (a pro se appellant’s pleadings are to be liberally construed), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Eric Krafft v. Department of Transportation
E.g., IAF, Tab 4 at 24, 68-78, 111-15; see, e.g., Melnick v. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 101 (1989) (finding that a 30 -day performance improvement plan provided the appellant with a reasonable opportunity to demonstrate acceptable performance), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Ronnell L Pulley v. Department of Justice
See, e.g., Melnick v. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97-98 (1989) (observing that parties without legal representation are not required to plead issues with precision), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Darrell Smith v. Department of Justice
See, e.g., Melnick v. Department of Housing and Urban Development , 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97, 101 (1989) (finding that a 30-day PIP satisfied the agency’s obligation to provide a secretarial employee with a reasonable opportunity to demonstrate acceptable performance on ad hoc and timekeeping tasks), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 Department of the Air Force, 120 M.S.P.R. 239 , ¶ 23 (2013).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Shirley Muhleisen v. Department of Veterans Affairs
Compare Melnick v. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97 (1989) (recognizing that pro se pleadings are to be liberally construed), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Karl Brookins v. Department of the Interior
See, e.g., Melnick v. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 101 (1989), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Lawrence Mattison v. Department of Veterans Affairs
See, e.g., Melnick v. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97-98 (1989) (observing that parties without legal representation are not required to plead issues with precision), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Lawrence Mattison v. Department of Veterans Affairs
See, e.g., Melnick v. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97-98 (1989) (observing that parties without legal representation are not required to plead issues with precision), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Virgie L. Grant-Brooks v. Department of the Treasury
RFR File, Tab 5 at 3; see, e.g., Melnick v. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97-98 (1989) (observing that parties without legal representation are not required to plead issues with precision), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Thomas H. Whipple v. Department of Veterans Affairs
See, e.g., Melnick v. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97-98 (1989) (observing that parties without legal representation are not required to plead issues with precision), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Juhee Boyd v. Department of the Army
See, e.g., Melnick v. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97-98 (1989) (observing that parties without legal representation are not required to plead issues with precision), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Melissa Anderson v. Department of Veterans Affairs
See, e.g., Melnick v. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97 (1989), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Melissa Anderson v. Department of Veterans Affairs
See, e.g., Melnick v. Department of Housing & Urban Development, 42 M.S.P.R. 93 , 97 (1989), aff’d, 899 F.2d 1228 (Fed.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Kennametal, Inc.
v.
Tool Serv, Inc.
v.
Tool Serv, Inc.
90-1009.
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
May 3, 1990.
899 F.2d 1228
Unpublished
Unpublished Disposition
NOTICE: Federal Circuit Local Rule 47.8(b) states that opinions and orders which are designated as not citable as precedent shall not be employed or cited as precedent. This does not preclude assertion of issues of claim preclusion, issue preclusion, judicial estoppel, law of the case or the like based on a decision of the Court rendered in a nonprecedential opinion or order.
KENNAMETAL, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
TOOL SERV, INC., Defendant-Appellant.
Nos. 89-1630, 90-1009.
United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.
March 23, 1990.
Rehearing Denied May 3, 1990.
1
AFFIRMED. See Fed.Cir.R. 36.
*
The Honorable Allen Sharp, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, sitting by designation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 293(a)