5 ms·

An Ordinary Guy Took a $3k Case to the Supreme Court

31 points by zeroonetwothree 2y ago

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
teeray 2y ago
> 11-year quest to get $3000 of pay That it should take this long to decide this case is simply appalling.
rkagerer 2y ago
Anyone have a working, non-paywalled version? Edit: Not the article, but has a little summary https://www.oyez.org/cases/2023/23-21 https://www.oyez.org/cases/2023/23-21
- tcj_phx 2y ago
  Scotusblog coverage: https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/harrow-v-department-of-defense/ https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/harrow-v-departm... Filings can be read on the docket: https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-21.html https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/... This is a paid petition filed with the assistance of counsel. The printing fees alone are vastly more than $3000. I bet the federal employee union is supporting this petition.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
opello 2y ago
It'd be interesting to have a more detailed summary to understand why the government side thinks it's most reasonable to "sneak out" of deciding this on the facts by citing a waivable rule on deadlines, especially when there were 2+5 years of delays not at all caused by the "victim" in the situation. > I mean -- and -- and -- and, gosh, I mean, waiting seven years to rule on this fellow's claim and then sending it --him an email and to an old email address and he acted as fast as he could, I mean, it's not wholly inconceivable the government might, in its magnanimity, choose to waive this defect? It just seems like there's got to be more to it than so many individuals failing so radically, or the incentives to "do the wrong thing" (the inequitable thing) have to be insane.
fred_is_fred 2y ago
Here's the summary since the article is paywalled. From oyez.org: "Stuart R. Harrow was a federal employee who was furloughed in 2013. He appealed the furlough decision to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), but due to short staffing, the MSPB did not rule on Harrow’s appeal for more than five years, during which Harrow changed his email address. On May 11, 2022, the MSPB affirmed the agency’s furlough action and attempted to inform Harrow that he had 60 days to seek judicial review. However, because he had changed email addresses, Harrow did not learn of the MSPB’s denial until after 60 days had elapsed. On September 8, 2022, Harrow moved the Board for an extension of time to appeal, but the Board denied the motion for lack of jurisdiction. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the denial, holding that the timely filing of a petition from the Board's final decision is a jurisdictional requirement and “not subject to equitable tolling.”" 5 years to review, wow.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

teeray 2y ago

> 11-year quest to get $3000 of pay That it should take this long to decide this case is simply appalling.

rkagerer 2y ago

Anyone have a working, non-paywalled version? Edit: Not the article, but has a little summary https://www.oyez.org/cases/2023/23-21 https://www.oyez.org/cases/2023/23-21

tcj_phx 2y ago
Scotusblog coverage: https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/harrow-v-department-of-defense/ https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/harrow-v-departm... Filings can be read on the docket: https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/23-21.html https://www.supremecourt.gov/docket/docketfiles/html/public/... This is a paid petition filed with the assistance of counsel. The printing fees alone are vastly more than $3000. I bet the federal employee union is supporting this petition.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

opello 2y ago

It'd be interesting to have a more detailed summary to understand why the government side thinks it's most reasonable to "sneak out" of deciding this on the facts by citing a waivable rule on deadlines, especially when there were 2+5 years of delays not at all caused by the "victim" in the situation. > I mean -- and -- and -- and, gosh, I mean, waiting seven years to rule on this fellow's claim and then sending it --him an email and to an old email address and he acted as fast as he could, I mean, it's not wholly inconceivable the government might, in its magnanimity, choose to waive this defect? It just seems like there's got to be more to it than so many individuals failing so radically, or the incentives to "do the wrong thing" (the inequitable thing) have to be insane.

fred_is_fred 2y ago

Here's the summary since the article is paywalled. From oyez.org: "Stuart R. Harrow was a federal employee who was furloughed in 2013. He appealed the furlough decision to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), but due to short staffing, the MSPB did not rule on Harrow’s appeal for more than five years, during which Harrow changed his email address. On May 11, 2022, the MSPB affirmed the agency’s furlough action and attempted to inform Harrow that he had 60 days to seek judicial review. However, because he had changed email addresses, Harrow did not learn of the MSPB’s denial until after 60 days had elapsed. On September 8, 2022, Harrow moved the Board for an extension of time to appeal, but the Board denied the motion for lack of jurisdiction. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the denial, holding that the timely filing of a petition from the Board's final decision is a jurisdictional requirement and “not subject to equitable tolling.”" 5 years to review, wow.