Lack of Detail Leads to Denial of Survivor Annuity
Here is another recent case that establishes the critical importance of dotting every “i” and crossing every “t” if a retired federal employee intends to give a former spouse a survivor annuity.
Read summaries of court cases and decisions that impact federal employees and retirees.
Here is another recent case that establishes the critical importance of dotting every “i” and crossing every “t” if a retired federal employee intends to give a former spouse a survivor annuity.
There is yet another chapter in the case of the Interior Department economist who was bestowed with a $383,600 monetary award by a group that the employee had assisted in bringing a successful false claims action involving underpayment by oil companies of royalties owed to the Mineral Management Service.
A Navy employee got aggressive with the shipyard’s security personnel resulting in his badge and clearance being pulled. Without a clearance he was suspended indefinitely from his job. He did not find much sympathy when he appealed.
This case involves an IRS examiner responsible for finding fraud in more complicated tax returns. He pled guilty to tax fraud and–not surprisingly–the agency fired him.
A Navy employee fired for misuse of a government travel credit card won at the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals the first time around. After being retroactively reinstated, the Navy fired her again for the same misconduct. This time it sticks.
Nexus was not an issue when a Navy Security Specialist was arrested for taking photos in the wrong places. The arrest led to the suspension of his clearance, and that led to suspension from his job.
This recent court case affirms the removal of a USPS employee for failing to follow required procedures in taking leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act.
A former spouse learns she cannot receive the survivor annuity she claims her ex husband, who had worked as a physician with the VA, intended for her to have.
A NASA auditor fired for workplace disturbance and making threatening statements gets no relief from the MSPB or the appeals court.
A recent MSPB case provides an important clarification and constriction of a substantive standard of law which was in danger of becoming expanded well beyond the plain language of the statute undergirding the eligibility requirements of a Federal Disability Retirement application.