Anonymous v. Macy

Decision Date11 July 1968
Docket NumberNo. 25671.,25671.
Citation398 F.2d 317
PartiesANONYMOUS, Appellant, v. John W. MACY, Jr., as Chairman, United States Civil Service Commission, et al., Appellees.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit

Guy Sparks, Anniston, Ala., Charles Morgan, Jr., Atlanta, Ga., Herbert S. Thatcher, Washington, D. C., for appellant.

Macon L. Weaver, E. Ray Acton, Birmingham, Ala., for appellees.

Before JOHN R. BROWN, Chief Judge, BELL, Circuit Judge, and HOOPER, District Judge.

PER CURIAM:

We are here dealing with a petition to review administrative actions of Civil Service, discharging appellant from the Post Office Department for alleged homosexual acts.

The fact that appellant committed acts is not in dispute. Counsel for appellant, however, argue at great length, and with considerable ability, that homosexual acts constitute private acts upon the part of such employees, that they do not affect the efficiency of the service, and should not be the basis of discharge. That contention is not accepted by this Court. See Hargett v. Summerfield, 100 U.S.App.D.C. 85, 243 F.2d 29 (1957).1

There is another ground of complaint, however, which has given this Court some concern, and that relates to the admission in evidence at the administrative hearing of an affidavit by one Wells charging homosexual acts of affiant with appellant. Under petinent statutes, regulations and court decisions, failure to inform appellant that this affidavit would be used against him would constitute good grounds for remanding the matter to the Civil Service authorities for a new hearing. However, as carefully pointed out by the trial judge in denying a review, there was clearly a waiver of this procedural defect by appellant and his counsel; as stated by the trial judge this point constituted an "afterthought" by appellant because of the following circumstances: Appellant was notified that he would be tried for "immoral or notoriously disgraceful conduct." Contrary to the contentions of appellant's counsel the affidavit of Wells, as shown by statement of the Hearing Officer, was a part of the record of the hearing.2 After the hearing the Assistant Postmaster General wrote plaintiff stating that the charges against him were proven, including reference to "the sworn statement of Mr. Wells." Despite that fact no error was claimed as to the same on appeal. The Post Office Department forwarded to the Regional Director of the Commission in Atlanta a list of documents which were enclosed,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 cases
  • Drake v. Covington County Board of Education
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Alabama
    • January 23, 1974
    ...are reasonably foreseeable and have a specific connection with the efficiency of the educational program. See also Anonymous v. Macy, 398 F.2d 317 (5 C.C.A.1968), in which the Fifth Circuit made short work of affirming Judge Grooms' opinion and "Counsel for appellant, * * * argue * * * that......
  • Childers v. Dallas Police Dept., CA3-76-0469-F.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Texas
    • March 30, 1981
    ...conduct and activities either arbitrary or capricious. See, e. g., Beller, supra; Singer, supra; McConnell, supra; Anonymous v. Macy, 398 F.2d 317 (5th Cir. 1968).20 These authorities, as well as the considerations enumerated above, are adequate to sustain the police department's actions ag......
  • Gilbert v. Johnson, Civ. A. No. 16424.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Georgia
    • September 20, 1976
    ...830 (5 Cir. 1974); Mann v. Klassen, 480 F.2d 159, 161 (5 Cir. 1973); Dozier v. United States, 473 F.2d 866 (5 Cir. 1973); Anonymous v. Macy, 398 F.2d 317 (5 Cir. 1968); Chiriaco v. United States, 339 F.2d 588 (5 Cir. 1964). See also Kletschka v. Driver, 411 F.2d 436 (2 Cir. 1969); Sexton v.......
  • Bostock v. Clayton Cnty.
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • June 15, 2020
    ...Security Clearances: Consideration of Sexual Orientation in the Clearance Process 2 (GAO/NSIAD–95–21, 1995). See, e.g. , Anonymous v. Macy , 398 F.2d 317, 318 (CA5 1968) (affirming dismissal of postal employee for homosexual acts).In 1964, individuals who were known to be homosexual could n......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT