Jackson v. Veterans Administration
768 F.2d 1325 (1985)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
When an administrative board reviews a presiding official's initial decision, it must afford special deference to the official's credibility determinations based on witness demeanor. To reverse such a finding, the board must articulate a sound, record-based reason for its contrary evaluation; it cannot simply disagree with the presiding official's assessment.
Facts:
- Riley E. Jackson worked as an Animal Caretaker Foreman, a supervisory position, at a Veterans Administration (VA) Medical Center.
- A subordinate employee, Ms. LaSalle, alleged that on one occasion, Jackson walked up and kissed her without her consent while she was talking on the telephone in a basement hallway.
- Ms. LaSalle's roommate, Mr. Kester, who was on the other end of the phone call, testified that he heard a sound like a kiss and that Ms. LaSalle immediately told him Jackson had kissed her.
- Ms. LaSalle also alleged that on several occasions, when she asked Jackson for permission to leave work a few minutes early for her bowling night, he would respond by asking for a kiss in return.
- Another VA employee, Ms. Herring, testified that she was present on a few of these occasions and heard Jackson ask Ms. LaSalle for a kiss in exchange for leaving early.
- Ms. LaSalle stated that she never actually gave Jackson a kiss in order to leave work early.
- Jackson denied both kissing Ms. LaSalle and asking her for kisses in exchange for leaving early.
Procedural Posture:
- The Veterans Administration (the agency) removed Riley E. Jackson from his position based on five alleged incidents of sexual harassment.
- Jackson (petitioner) appealed his removal to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), a quasi-judicial administrative agency.
- An MSPB presiding official conducted a hearing and issued an initial decision, finding that the agency had not proven any of the five charges by a preponderance of the evidence and reversed the removal action.
- The agency petitioned the full three-member MSPB for a review of the presiding official's decision.
- The full MSPB granted the petition, reversed the presiding official's findings on two of the five incidents (A and D), and affirmed Jackson's removal based on those two incidents and his prior disciplinary record.
- Jackson appealed the final decision of the MSPB to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
May the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) reverse a presiding official's credibility findings without articulating a sound, record-based reason for its contrary evaluation, particularly when the official's findings were based on observing witness demeanor?
Opinions:
Majority - Nies, Circuit Judge.
No, in part. The MSPB may not reverse a presiding official's credibility determination without a sound, record-based reason, and an appellate court will find a board's decision less substantial when it contradicts the official who observed the witnesses. The court held the board's reversal regarding the alleged kiss (Incident A) was improper because it was a one-on-one credibility dispute where the board failed to explain why it discredited Jackson's testimony, which the presiding official found credible. However, the board's reversal regarding the requests for kisses (Incident D) was proper because the presiding official had completely ignored the corroborating testimony of a third-party witness, Ms. Herring; thus, the board's weighing of the evidence was more complete, not merely a substitution of credibility judgment. Because only the lesser charge was sustained, the penalty of removal was excessive and the case was remanded for determination of a lesser penalty.
Analysis:
This case establishes a critical standard for judicial review of administrative agency decisions where a review board and a hearing officer disagree on witness credibility. By adopting the principles from Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB, the Federal Circuit holds that while the MSPB has the power to overturn its presiding officials, that power is not absolute. The board must provide a reasoned explanation for reversing credibility findings based on demeanor, which protects the integrity of the initial fact-finding process. This decision reinforces that an appellate court's "substantial evidence" review will be more searching and give less deference to the board's findings when the official who actually observed the witnesses reached a contrary conclusion.
Unlock the full brief for Jackson v. Veterans Administration