About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

B-201602 1 (1981-04-01)

handle is hein.gao/gaobadjgv0001 and id is 1 raw text is: DECISION FILE: B-201602 THE COWIPTROLLER GENERAL OF THE UNITED BTATEB WASHINGTON, D. C. 20548 DATE: April 1, 1981 MATTER OF: James L. Sweeney -Lcourt leave erroneously grante fl DIGEST: Employee who was unsuccessful litigant in civil rights action in Federal court was granted court leave by agency contrary to 59 Comp. Gen. 290 (1980). Although agency was unaware of decision, agency must retro- actively correct employee's leave record. 00,7,05 The decision is controlling even though Office of Personnel Management instruction reflecting that holding was not issued until after agency had erroneously granted leave in question. We have been asked by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) to determine whether it must now adjust Mr. James L. Sweeney's leave account to charge him leave for 48 hours of absence previously treated as court leave. The court leave in ques- tion was granted in connection with Mr. Sweeney's unsuccess- ful discrimination action against his employing agency under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, codi- fied at 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-16 et seq. Although the agency's determination to grant Mr. Sweeney court leave predated the Office of Personnel Management's instructions making it clear that court leave is not authorized in this situation, the employee's absence should be charged to the otherwise appro- priate leave account on the basis of our holding in Wilma Pasake, 59 Comp. Gen. 290 (1980). From June 24 to July 1, 1980, Mr. Sweeney was granted 48 hours of court leave to pursue a discrimination action against his employing agency, the Defense Logistics Agency, in Federal District Court. As the record reveals, the agency was unsure if Mr. Sweeney was entitled to court leave but concluded that certain regulations and statutes, although not directly applicable, provided support for its determination to grant the leave in question. At the time of Mr. Sweeney's court action the agency was unaware of our decision in 59 Comp. Gen. 290, in which we held that the authority of 5 U.S.C. 6322 to grant court leave to a Government employee summoned as a witness in certain proceedings does not extend to an employee who is the plaintiff in such action. In that decision, issued

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most