Skip to main content

Spellers v. United States

Fed. Cl.November 6, 2020No. 18-47
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Patricia E. Campbell-Smith
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
summary judgment
Circuit
Federal Circuit

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

DiscriminationRetaliationWage Theft

Outcome

Court denied the government's motion for summary judgment on plaintiff's Equal Pay Act claim, finding genuine disputes of material fact regarding whether her male comparators performed substantially equal work. However, the court granted dismissal of plaintiff's retaliation claim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

Excerpt

REPORTED OPINION granting in part partial dismissal as to plaintiff's retaliation claim (Count II) and denying in part [32] Motion for Summary Judgment as to plaintiff's EPA claim (Count I). Pursuant to RCFC 54(b), as there is not just reason for delay, the clerk's office is directed to ENTER judgment DISMISSING Count II of plaintiff's complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, without prejudice. On or before 12/4/2020, the parties are directed to CONFER and FILE a Joint Status Report. The status report shall state whether settlement is a feasible option in this case or whether the parties intend to file any additional dispositive motions. If dispositive motions are to be filed, the status report shall set forth a proposed schedule in that regard. If neither settlement nor dispositive motions are viable, the parties shall set forth a proposed schedule for the exchanges required by Appendix A, paragraph 13 and the filings required by paragraphs 14 through 17. Signed by Judge Patricia E. Campbell-Smith. (TQ) Service on parties made.

What This Ruling Means

**Spellers v. United States: Federal Employee's Mixed Victory in Pay and Retaliation Case** This case involved a federal employee named Spellers who sued the U.S. government, claiming two things: unequal pay under the Equal Pay Act and workplace retaliation for complaining about that pay discrimination. The court made a split decision. It dismissed the retaliation claim, ruling that this particular court didn't have the legal authority to hear that type of complaint against the federal government. However, the court allowed the equal pay claim to move forward, rejecting the government's request to throw out that part of the case entirely. The court told both sides to meet and report back on how to proceed with the remaining pay discrimination claim. This ruling matters for federal workers because it shows the complexity of challenging government employers in court. While workers can pursue equal pay claims against federal agencies in certain courts, retaliation claims may need to be filed elsewhere or through different procedures. Federal employees facing discrimination should understand that different types of workplace violations may require different legal approaches and courts. The case ultimately settled, though no damages were reported, suggesting the parties reached some agreement outside of court.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.