Source: https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/613/49/198138/
Timestamp: 2020-01-17 19:19:54
Document Index: 589879627

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 7703', '§ 7703', '§ 902', '§ 1101', '§ 702', '§ 1346', '§ 1491', '§ 1201']

Franklin A. Ellis, Petitioner, v. Merit Systems Protection Board, Respondent, 613 F.2d 49 (3d Cir. 1980) :: Justia
Justia › US Law › Case Law › Federal Courts › Courts of Appeals › Third Circuit › 1980 › Franklin A. Ellis, Petitioner, v. Merit Systems Protection Board, Respondent
Franklin A. Ellis, Petitioner, v. Merit Systems Protection Board, Respondent, 613 F.2d 49 (3d Cir. 1980)
US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit - 613 F.2d 49 (3d Cir. 1980) Submitted Jan. 7, 1980. Decided Jan. 18, 1980
Under the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, any employee adversely affected by a decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board may obtain judicial review in either the Court of Claims or a United States Court of Appeals. Pub. L. No.95-454, § 7703, 92 Stat. 1111, 1143-44, 5 U.S.C.A. § 7703 (Supp.1979). The Act became effective January 11, 1979, however, and a savings clause provides that "(n)o provision of this Act shall affect any administrative proceedings pending at the time such provision takes effect. Orders shall be issued in such proceedings and appeals shall be taken therefrom as if this Act had not been enacted." Id. at § 902(b), 92 Stat. at 1224, 5 U.S.C.A. § 1101 note (Supp.1979). Prior to the Civil Service Reform Act, review could not proceed in a court of appeals, but had to be brought in a district court or in the Court of Claims. 5 U.S.C. § 702 (1976) (providing right of review); 28 U.S.C. § 1346 (1976) (granting jurisdiction in district courts, concurrent with Court of Claims); Id. § 1491. Ellis' administrative action was in process, and the final order issued, before the effective date of the Act, but his petition to this Court was filed after the provision for direct review in a court of appeals was in effect. Thus, if the savings clause applies to the date judicial review is initiated, this Court has jurisdiction; if, however, the savings clause reaches administrative proceedings pending or completed when the Act became effective, we do not have jurisdiction over Ellis' petition. The Board has construed the clause to mean the latter:
44 Fed.Reg. 38349, 38360-61 (June 29, 1979) 5 C.F.R. § 1201.191(b) (1979).