Roland Spruill v. Merit Systems Protection Board

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that 5 U.S.C. § 2303(b)(8) does not encom- pass alleged retaliation for discrimination complaints
• recognizing that, in enacting sections 2302(b)(8) and 2302(b)(9), Congress purposefully distinguished between “reprisal based on disclosure of information and reprisal based upon exercising a right to complain”; the former is covered in section 2302(b)(8
• noting that “the EEOC framework specifically provides for employees who suffer reprisal for the filing of [an] EEOC complaint”
• holding dismissal for failure to state a claim is a final judgement on the merits
• explaining that employees cannot maintain simultaneous Board and EEOC jurisdiction to resolve the same alleged violations
• holding that “[w]hen a non-frivolous claim for relief has been asserted ... and the outcome is determined by whether the facts support that claim, a decision ... that they do not is a failure to prove the claim, not a lack of jurisdiction”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).