Document: 456 U.S. 728 102 S.Ct. 2118 72 L.Ed.2d 520 ARMY AND AIR FORCE EXCHANGE SERVICE, Petitionerv.Arthur Edward SHEEHAN. No. 80-1437. Argued Feb. 23, 1982. Decided June 1, Syllabus Respondent, while employed in a data processing position with petitioner Army and Air Force Exchange Service (AAFES), was selected for participation the AAFES Executive Management Program (EMP). A regulation provided that EMP status could be withdrawn conduct off job reflecting discredit upon AAFES. Respondent discharged from after pleading guilty to misdemeanor charges of violating state drug laws base. His administrative appeal denied. While pending before Judge Advocate General Force, respondent filed suit against Federal District Court, alleging his rights due process free impartial pursuant regulations were infringed, seeking reinstatement damages, including backpay. The Court dismissed complaint want subject-matter jurisdiction. Appeals reversed, concluding Tucker Act, which gives federal courts jurisdiction over certain suits United States founded express or implied contracts, basis respondent's claims monetary relief. court held that, whether not employment initiated by appointment contract, governing separation procedures created an implied-in-fact contract would adhere those continued employment, allegation dismissal violated equivalent breach contract. Held : Act did confer claim money damages. Pp. 733-741. (a) Nothing record relevant indicates Rather, evidence shows he appointed positions. With respect position, prohibited negotiating him, selection clearly appointment. There is no reason remand evidentiary hearing on nature status. 735-738. (b) erred implying based solely personnel premising regulations, do specifically authorize awards v. Testan, 424 392, 96 948, 47 114, controlling. Moreover, Congress' intent prohibit Back Pay employees, as opposed employees generally, subverted if employee sue under whenever asserted violation termination. In fact, Appeals' reasoning extend reach any statute regulation. 738-741. 619 F.2d 1132, reversed. Samuel A. Alito, Jr., Newark, N. J., petitioner. Ira E. Tobolowsky, Dallas, Tex., respondent. Justice BLACKMUN delivered opinion Court. 1 issue presented this case have civil action damages brought former military exchange who contests validity discharge. exists 28 U.S.C. § 1346(a)(2) (1976 ed., Supp. IV). 2 * 3 1962, respondent, Arthur Sheehan, (AAFES Service).1 Five years later, designated commander Service's (EMP); program "intended fulfill continuing requirement highly qualified dedicated executive will readily available meet worldwide requirements AAFES." Regulation (AR) 60-21/Air (AFR) 147-15, ch. 5, II, ¶ 5-6 (1 Aug. 1979).2 Employees enjoy special retention, insurance, retirement benefits. On other hand, are subject obligations, principal one being must accept transfer facility country abroad. 5-9(a)(2). may for, among things, "conduct 5-9(c). Pursuant EMP, required "acknowledg[e] writing underst[ood] accept[ed] conditions prescribed Commander, 5-7(b). 4 1975, serving shopping center manager at Fort Jackson, S. C., arrested base possession controlled substances. plea bargain, pleaded four counts laws. He sentenced 18 months' probation $1,000 fine imposed. 5 March 16, 1976, received advance written notice cause. Referring conviction, stated reflects such your retention capacity incompatible best interests App. 11. James J. Stapleton, Manager Piedmont Area Exchange, signed notice, but, because prior approval had been obtained Major C. W. Hospelhorn, Following investigation, Stapleton issued final cause, effective April 19, 1976. Id., 17. This advised "in view entire weight resulted guilty." Ibid. 6 accord authorized procedures, appeal. examiner determined acted compliance applicable but concluded reflect some Service. therefore recommended granted reinstated backpay grade transferred assignment another region. however, acting appellate authority, disagreed, denied 7 1978, letter counsel addressed new Bobby Presley, requested reconsideration. 40. contrary rules law. Presley reopened referred it Lieutenant Charles Buckingham, Chairman Board Directors At Buckingham's request, reviewed Force. supported charge reflected inconsistent interests. General, agreed Hospelhorn disqualified authority; felt appropriate Buckingham act capacity, followed advice B 8 matter Northern Texas. first count alleged infringed when both authority authority. second count, claimed denial arbitrary capricious, abuse discretion, unsupported substantial unwarranted facts, statutory constitutional provisions. sought 9 without opinion, Pet. Cert. 17a. 10 Fifth Circuit It 1346(a)(2), 1132 (1980). Whether held, providing cause only guaranteeing "manifest[ed] understanding parties concerning discharge Sheehan employment." 1138 (emphasis original). Accordingly, considered "part collateral between its dealings him." court's view, reinforced well-established legal principle agency comply own regulations. "equivalent contract," ibid., ruling award relief.3 11 Because appeared conflict our precedents, we certiorari. 454 813, 88, 70 81 (1981). II 12 AAFES, like exchanges, " 'ar[m] government deemed essential performance governmental functions . partake[s] whatever immunities constitution statutes.' Mississippi Tax Comm'n, 421 599, 606, 95 1872, 1877, 44 404 (1975), quoting, approval, language same case, 378 F.Supp. 558, 562-563 (SD Miss.1974). As result, entertain actions Congress has consented suit; "a waiver traditional sovereign immunity 'cannot unequivocally expressed.' 399, 953, 114 (1976), quoting King, 395 4, 89 1501, 1502, 23 52 (1969). 13 effects explicit provides pertinent part: 14 "The district shall original jurisdiction, concurrent Claims of: 15 16 ". Any States, exceeding $10,000 amount, either Constitution, Congress, department, liquidated unliquidated cases sounding tort. For purpose paragraph, States."4 IV) added).5 17 does assert Constitution specific affords him remedy "express States" parties. Specifically, urges became employee, least entered virtue appointment, We reject contentions. determining result look Hopkins, 427 123, 2508, 49 361 wrongful-discharge constituted per curiam inHopkins noted premised well goods services, id., 126, S.Ct., 2510, enter into service contracts. 127-128, 2511. But also observed many their positions, remanded consideration question plaintiff determination dependent "an analysis statutes previously described light adduced plaintiff's particular case." 130, 2512. 19 Although alleges employed, initially entering points nothing substantiates claim. supports view. observes "employed" 3; pertaining "employees" refer "Federal instrumentality AR 60-21/AFR I, 1-6(a); 2, &Par; 2-2, 2-3 1979). if, alleges, him. See 60-20/AFR 147-14, 3, III, 3-26(d) (15 Nov. 1978). 20 Respondent's plainly appear provision entitled "Exchange Personnel Policies," rather than §§ III.6 And, connotes one's "nomination, selection, designation status," 5-8.7 Furthermore, complains separated contracted provide services. 4-5, 7; see 3. 21 Despite these clear indications maintains, citing supra, aimed ascertaining examine erroneously assumed never appointed. sufficient withstand Government's motion dismiss "the susceptible time." U.S., Resolution question, noted, depended Ibid.8 22 complaint, contrast, Even moved ground (non-contract) employee," Memorandum Points Authorities Support Defendant's Motion Dismiss Alternative Summary Judgment 8, seek amend allege facts indicating existence Opposition Defendants' (sic ) Alternative, 5-6; 1-3 (referring "employee" violations employees).9 discussed above, all effect positions Under circumstances, conclude serve now able adduce evidence, heretofore declined present, employed—either EMP—pursuant decision rests different theory employment.10 approach, foreclosed decisions. 24 concluded, dissent, they reclassification higher grade. observed, "is itself jurisdictional statute; create substantive right enforceable damages." 398, 953. "asserted entitlement depends 'can fairly interpreted mandating compensation Government damage sustained.' 400, 954, Eastport S.S. Corp. 178 Ct.Cl. 607, 372 1002, 1009 (1967). explicitly rejected argument relating automatically creates 401, 954; 25 Testan makes clear, cannot damages.11 escape force relying Court's observation plaintiffs "rest distinguishing effected To undermine where explicitly. Admittedly, neither until very late litigation. And surely so instead directing dismissed. 408, 958. Hopkins contract; despite contravened suggests give rise contract.12 26 addition results approach "rende[r] superfluous" "many statutes—such Act—that expressly carefully limited circumstances." 404, 956. permits recover lost wages unjustified withdrawal reduction part" otherwise entitled, 5596(b)(1) IV), denies personnel. 2105(c)(1) obviously impact circumstances: concede oral argument, Tr. Oral Arg. 20-21. 27 controlling, hold awards. judgment sustained hired find 29 ordered. 30 THE CHIEF JUSTICE concurs judgment. nonappropriated fund is, receive funds congressional appropriation. 4779(c) 9779(c). control Secretaries and, post intended "to convenient reliable sources soldiers can obtain ordinary needs lowest possible prices." Standard Oil Co. Johnson, 316 481, 484-485, 62 1168, 1169, 86 L.Ed. 1611 (1942). cited currently effect. They differ material outstanding Reasoning nonmonetary relief, looked general federal-question provision, 1331(a), support finding request reinstatement. 1331(a) constitute immunity, 1976 amendment Administrative Procedure 702, effecting agencies, judicial review. F.2d, 1138-1140. Given relief alternative statutes, finally, mandamus statute, 1361. 1140-1141. Neither side seeks review rulings here. last sentence added 1970 Pub.L.91-350, 84 Stat. 449, following Relying "Government assumes none financial obligations" 485, 1170, Claims, series decisions, instrumentalities. 125, (1976). 1970, close "loophole" affording contractors 2511; S.Rep.No.91-268, p. (1969); H.R.Rep.No.91-933, (1970), U.S.Code Cong. & Admin.News, 3477. Section less. sole greater $10,000. 1491 Supp.IV). Both provisions identical. Richardson Morris, 409 464, 466, 93 629, 631, 34 647 (1973); Sherwood, 312 584, 590-591, 61 767, 771, 85 1058 (1941). define "service contract" follows: "A whereby contractor performs installation, laundry, drycleaning, photo processing, repair service. type include procurement direct services janitorial window cleaning service." A, A-8(e) portion "acknowledged understands accepts An employee's acknowledgment acceptance hardly demonstrate surely, employer require nominee acknowledge Hopkins' settled remand, further inquiry made Brief Petitioner n. 9; 14; 28. amended executed includes breach-of-contract refers repeatedly "employment agreement." First Amended Complaint 6-7. grounded contracts Hatzlachh Supply 444 460, 465, 100 647, 650, 614 Like involve "for improperly exacted retained" promises money. 402, 954. distinguishable inferred promising payment. Griffin 215 710, 714-715 (1978); New York Airways, Inc. 177 800, 816-817, 369 743, 751-752 (1966); Radium Mines, 139 144, 147-148, 153 403, 405-406 (1957); Aycock-Lindsey 171 518, 521 (CA5 1948); Augusta Aviation, 500 785, 786-787 Ga.1980), rev'd, 671 445 (CA11 1982). demonstrated part Bodek Department Treasury, Bureau Public Debt, 532 277, 279, (CA2), cert. denied, 429 849, 97 137, 50 122 (1976); Wolak 366 1106, 1110 (Conn.1973); Spicer 217 44, (Kan.1963), aff'd, 332 750 (CA10 1964). "not wrongful suspension," 955, indicate, urges, termination suspension Act. relied disposing, summarily adversely, contention "plaintiff's Act."

Category: 8