Tennessee v. Dunlap

PETITIONER: Tennessee
RESPONDENT: Dunlap
LOCATION: Michelin Tire Warehouse

DOCKET NO.: 75-95
DECIDED BY: Burger Court (1975-1981)
LOWER COURT: United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

CITATION: 426 US 312 (1976)
ARGUED: Mar 22, 1976
DECIDED: Jun 10, 1976

ADVOCATES:
Alex B. Shipley, Jr. - for petitioners
William Terry Denton - for respondent

Facts of the case

Question

Media for Tennessee v. Dunlap

Audio Transcription for Oral Argument - March 22, 1976 in Tennessee v. Dunlap

Audio Transcription for Opinion Announcement - June 10, 1976 in Tennessee v. Dunlap

Warren E. Burger:

This disposition in number 75-95, Tennessee against Dunlap will be announced by Mr. Justice Marshall.

Thurgood Marshall:

This case is here on writ of certiorari to United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.

It requires us to consider whether the Court of Appeals correctly interpreted the provision of the National Guard Technicians Act of 1968.

That Act provided that the a National Guard Technician was a full-time civilian employee of the National Guard must be a member of the Guard and that a technician who was separated from the Guard, “shall be properly separated from his technician employment.”

The Act also provides that a technician may at anytime be separated from his technician employment for cause.

The respondent was denied re-enlistment in the Guard when his term of enlistment expired and it was then notified that his employment as a technician will be terminated because he was no longer member of the Guard.

The respondent brought this suit to challenge the denial of his request for re-enlistment and the termination of his employment as a technician.

The dispositive question before this Court is whether the Act's provision that a technician may discharged for cause and any application to a case in which the termination of a technician's employment follows is separation on the Guard.

In an opinion filed with the clerk today, we hold that it does not, and since the Court of Appeals' order is to the contrary, the judgment of that court is reversed.

Warren E. Burger:

Thank you, Mr. Justice Marshall.