Nicoletti v. Kest

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• using only “clearly dishonest” as a standard for nexus risked arbitrary results, “as the question of removal would turn on the Board’s subjective moral compass”
• reversing and remanding “[b]ecause it seems probable that Doe was disciplined at least in part because the deciding official mistakenly believed that his misconduct was in violation of the law”
• criticizing a disciplinary board for failing “to articulate a meaningful standard as to when private dishonesty [by an FBI agent] rises to the level of misconduct that adversely affects the ‘efficiency of the service’” (emphasis added) (quoting 5 U.S.C. § 7513(a) (2006))
• criticizing a disciplinary board for failing \to articulate a meaningful standard as to when private dishonesty [by an FBI agent] rises to the level of misconduct that adversely affects the 'efficiency of the service' \ (emphasis added) (quoting 5 U.S.C. § 7513(a) (2006))
• finding the Board’s nexus analysis inadequate and remanding the case for more specific findings demonstrating the off-duty misconduct of the appellant and the impact of that conduct on his ability to perform his job or the mission of the agency

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).