Norris v. United States

Background

Norris was a customs employee at the port of Baltimore who became a customs inspector on July 2, 1907, paid $4 per day. On February 20, 1913, he was told his services would be dispensed with and his position vacated. He later wrote the Treasury saying he had been dismissed without being given charges or an opportunity to be heard as a law required. The Assistant Secretary arranged for his reinstatement on February 20, 1914 so he could be given the chance to answer charges; he took the oath March 5, 1914, was suspended pending investigation, and answered the charges on March 9, 1914. On April 25, 1914 the Department found the charges insufficient to justify dismissal but said no vacancy existed and abolished the temporary position created to give him a hearing.

Reasoning

The Court considered whether Norris used reasonable diligence to assert his right to the office and to its pay after his removal. The record shows he did not promptly demand restoration or compensation and went many months without taking steps to vindicate his rights. The Court relied on the principle that a wrongfully removed employee must act reasonably to protect his claim, because the Government may fill or adjust the force. The Court also upheld the authority of the Assistant Secretary to act on the Secretary’s behalf and to create or abolish the temporary position. Given these findings, the Court concluded Norris did not meet the required diligence and could not recover compensation.

Real world impact

The decision means a federal employee who is removed without a hearing may lose the chance to recover pay if they fail to act promptly. It also confirms department officials can reinstate, suspend, and abolish positions as part of personnel decisions, and such actions can bar later recovery.