Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Kimm v. Department of the Treasury

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
61 F.3d 888 (1995)


Facts

Kevin R. Kimm (plaintiff) was a highly regarded criminal investigator for the federal Department of the Treasury (Department) (defendant). Department policy limited the employees’ use of government-owned vehicles, sometimes referred to as GOVs. Specifically, the policy permitted an employee to take a passenger in the government vehicle only if the passenger’s presence was essential for the successful performance of the employee’s official business. Kimm was on call at all times and needed his government vehicle to perform his job. In August 1962, Kimm’s wife temporarily suffered a serious medical emergency that prevented her from driving the Kimms’ son to and from daycare. During this emergency, Kimm occasionally transported the son in Kimm’s government vehicle. Kimm believed that the Department generally overlooked this kind of government-vehicle-policy deviation, and that the deviation was essential if Kimm were to remain available for his official duties while responding to a family emergency. Kimm therefore believed the deviation was permissible under the Department’s government-vehicle policy. However, the Department viewed Kimm’s deviation as a policy violation and suspended Kimm. In response, Kimm lodged a complaint with the board having jurisdiction over federal-employee disciplinary actions, the Merit Systems Protection Board. A board administrative judge, sometimes called an AJ, found that Kimm’s testimony about his state of mind in August 1962 was inherently more credible than the Department’s testimony on that issue. Accordingly, the administrative judge ruled that: (1) the record, taken as a whole, did not contain sufficiently substantial evidence to support Kimm’s suspension and (2) that Kimm should be reinstated in his job. The Department petitioned the full board for review. The board reversed the administrative judge’s ruling and upheld Kimm’s suspension. Kimm appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Lourie, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 220,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.