United States v. Testan

Background

Two trial attorneys who worked for the Defense Supply Agency asked their agency and the Civil Service Commission to reclassify their jobs from GS-13 to GS-14, claiming equal duties to other trial lawyers and entitlement to higher pay. After administrative denials, they sued in the Court of Claims seeking an order that they be reclassified as of the denial date and awarded backpay for the difference in salary.

Reasoning

The Supreme Court examined whether existing federal statutes create a right to money for retroactive reclassification. It explained that the Tucker Act only gives the Court of Claims jurisdiction over money claims when a substantive right to money exists, and that neither the Classification Act nor the Back Pay Act clearly requires the Government to pay backpay for alleged misclassification. The Court rejected the idea that every violation of an employment statute automatically allows money damages and held that the Court of Claims lacked authority to order reclassification or award retroactive pay in this case.

Real world impact

The decision leaves employees without a money remedy for past misclassification in the Court of Claims; they must use administrative review or seek prospective relief (for example, mandamus in a district court) instead. The Court also limited the situations in which the Court of Claims may remand matters to administrative agencies when no money judgment is available.

Dissents or concurrances

A dissent argued the Court of Claims was wrong to act because it is limited to deciding money claims and cannot create appointments or pay to which someone was never lawfully appointed.