Grace Mancilla v. United States of America

The Civil Service Commission removed appellant from her position as a civilian employee of the Department of the Army. The removal was based on a number of grounds, including “insubordination” and “inefficiency and unsatisfactory performance of * * * duties.”

Following the exhaustion of all administrative remedies, appellant instituted suit in the District Court. Seeking judicial review, she named the United States and the members of the Commission as defendants.

The District Court granted a motion to dismiss the action insofar as it was directed against the United States. This was proper. McEachern v. United States, 321 F.2d 31 (4th Cir. 1963); cf. Blackmar v. Guerre, 342 U.S. 512 , 72 S.Ct. 410 , 96 L.Ed. 534 (1952).

The respondent Commissioners moved for summary judgment, and their motion was granted. The principal contention here is that the procedure leading to appellant’s discharge was so defective as to effect deprivation of essential, fundamental rights.

In a case such as this, the judicial power is limited. The court’s only function, assuming that statutory procedures meet constitutional requirements, is to determine if the administrative body substantially complied…