Federal Circuit· 4/12/2007
Brodowy v. United States
Citations
- 482 F.3d 1370
- 2007 WL 1086313
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- concluding that plaintiffs, including Jenson, “were not entitled to the benefits of the two-step increase in pay received by controllers who transferred at a time when the [General Schedule] system was in effect”
- concluding that Jenson and other plaintiffs “were not entitled to the benefits of the two-step increase in pay received by controllers who transferred at a time when the [General Schedule] system was in effect for all the facilities”
- observing that the plaintiffs “were being paid pursuant to ... the administrative order that adopted the GS pay system for the interim period pending conversion of the air traffic controllers [to the PMS.]”
- impliedly recognizing the FAA’s authority and discretion to adopt and incorporate another portion of Title 5, the General Schedule compensation system, into the FAA’s Personnel Management System
- “Because the distinction between the two forms of dismissal has no apparent practical effect in this case, however, we need not remand for purposes of correcting the judgment in that respect.” (emphasis added
- “Where plaintiffs have invoked a money-mandating statute and have made a non-frivolous assertion that they are entitled to relief under the statute, we have held that the Court of Federal Claims has subject-matter jurisdiction over the case.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Cited by
27 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Jan's Helicopter Service, Inc. v. Federal Aviation AdministrationFederal Circuit· 2008-04-14· cited 642×
- Greenlee County, Arizona v. United StatesFederal Circuit· 2007-05-14· cited 350×
- Adair v. United StatesFederal Circuit· 2007-07-30· cited 95×
- St. Bernard Parish Government v. United StatesFederal Circuit· 2019-02-15· cited 91×
- Abbey v. United StatesFederal Circuit· 2014-03-21· cited 56×
- Schweitzer v. United StatesFederal Claims· 2008-07-18· cited 36×
- Cherbanaeff v. United StatesFederal Claims· 2007-07-12· cited 23×
- Jenson v. U.S. Office of Personnel ManagementDistrict of Columbia· 2011-12-12· cited 19×
- Whalen v. United StatesFederal Claims· 2010-06-24· cited 19×
- Price v. PanettaFederal Circuit· 2012-03-16· cited 16×
- Harmonia Holdings Group, LLC v. United StatesFederal Circuit· 2021-06-08· cited 15×
- Abbey v. United StatesFederal Claims· 2008-07-31· cited 15×
- Nicholson v. United StatesFederal Claims· 2007-07-27· cited 11×
- Northwest Louisiana Fish & Game Preserve Commission v. United StatesFederal Claims· 2007-10-31· cited 10×
- Mercier v. United StatesFederal Claims· 2014-02-27· cited 8×
- Saguaro Chevrolet, Inc. v. United StatesFederal Claims· 2007-07-25· cited 7×
- Federal Air Marshals(Fam) Fam 1 v. United StatesFederal Claims· 2008-11-05· cited 7×
- Abbey v. United StatesFederal Claims· 2015-12-01· cited 3×
- Collins v. United StatesFederal Claims· 2011-10-18· cited 3×
- Caraway v. United StatesFederal Claims· 2015-09-29· cited 2×
Cites
9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Fisher v. United StatesFederal Circuit· 2005-03-09· cited 1,462×
- Moden v. United StatesFederal Circuit· 2005-04-15· cited 245×
- Louise J. Hamlet v. United StatesFederal Circuit· 1995-10-27· cited 168×
- James L. Lewis v. United StatesFederal Circuit· 1995-11-16· cited 134×
- United States v. ClarkSupreme Court· 1982-01-12· cited 113×
- John Doe, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. United StatesFederal Circuit· 2006-09-11· cited 106×
- In re United StatesFederal Circuit· 2006-09-11· cited 81×
- National Air Traffic Controllers Ass'n v. Secretary of the Department of TransportationN.D. Ohio· 1998-03-02· cited 5×
- Libretto v. United StatesCourt of Claims· 1982-03-09· cited 2×
Other cases named Brodowy v. United States
1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.