Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 323 F.2d 276 - Robert S. McNamara Secretary of Defense v. Joseph W. Dick

Robert S. McNamara Secretary of Defense v. Joseph W. Dick’s Empirical Analysis

323 F.2d 276 · 1963

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
October 1981
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 1 district ·

Relationships

Relies on Pennsylvania Railroad v. Rychlik · Powell v. Branman · Bantel v. Brownell · Galloway v. United States

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““A. Management Option as to Methods of Separating Employees Who do not Accompany Activity. “1. Departmental Circular No. 740 reviewed the minimum considerations which employees must receive when an agency reduces its force in connection with a transfer of functions, and reviewed the rights of such employees in the transferred function. Under such circumstances employees in the transferred function must have an opportunity' to follow the function prior to any reduction-in-force action which might otherwise affect them. “2. The circular provided that employees who do not accept offers to transfer with their function could be separated for this cause under Parts 9 or 22 of the Civil Service Regulations. Some agencies have suggested that the Commission require that employees who do not accept offers to transfer with their function, and who cannot be placed in vacancies in other functions, be separated under Parts 9 or 22 of the Regulations. The Commission has carefully considered this suggestion and has determined that to so require would not be in the best interests of agency management, the career system, or the Federal Government as a whole. “3. We clearly recognize management’s prerogative to reassign employees from one position to another and from one place of employment to another. We also recognize that failure by an employee to respond to such management decisions is cause for discharge of the employee. Some transfers of functions involve employees whose services are nece”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““The applicability of Section 20.8 (a) depends upon a judgment as to whether, in conjunction with a reduction in force, a function or functions of one organizational entity can be identified as having been transferred to another organizational entity. * * * ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.