Chad Michael Brock v. Social Security Administration
Background
- Appellant Chad Michael Brock filed an Individual Right of Action (IRA) appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) against the Social Security Administration.
- An initial decision dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The appellant filed a petition for review.
- While the petition for review was pending, the parties executed a written settlement agreement during arbitration of related grievances (signed Aug. 31, 2016).
- The settlement provided for withdrawal and dismissal with prejudice of all actions arising from appellant’s employment, including any WPE/Board appeals, and described an alternative enforcement/resolution process outside Board enforcement.
- The Board examined whether the settlement was reached, understood, and whether the parties agreed it would be enforceable by the Board, concluding the parties did not agree to Board enforcement.
- Based on the appellant’s withdrawal under the settlement, the Board dismissed the petition for review with prejudice to refiling and advised of appeal rights to the Federal Circuit.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the MSPB may dismiss the appeal based on the parties’ settlement | Brock sought to have his petition resolved consistent with the settlement and submitted the agreement to the Board | Agency asserted settlement disposes of pending Board matters per its terms | Board found a valid settlement and dismissed the petition with prejudice |
| Whether parties met MSPB settlement-recording requirements | Brock submitted the agreement and indicated it should be in the record for enforcement | Agency and agreement terms specified the Board would not enforce the settlement; parties stipulated the Board should not accept it for enforcement | Board concluded parties understood terms and agreed not to have Board enforce the agreement |
| Whether the settlement is enforceable by the Board | Brock’s online interview suggested he wanted the agreement entered for enforcement | Agency and written terms designated an alternative enforcement mechanism outside the Board | Board held parties did not agree to Board enforcement and specified alternative breach resolution applies |
| Whether dismissal is with prejudice and effect on refiling | Brock withdrew petition pursuant to settlement | Agency sought dismissal consistent with settlement terms | Board dismissed petition with prejudice to refiling (normally may not be refiled) |
Key Cases Cited
- Mahoney v. U.S. Postal Service, 37 M.S.P.R. 146 (1988) (requirements for documenting settlements before dismissal)
- Lapine v. Department of Veterans Affairs, 114 M.S.P.R. 436 (2010) (dismissal with prejudice following settlement)
- Pinat v. Office of Personnel Management, 931 F.2d 1544 (Fed. Cir. 1991) (strict filing deadline rules for appeals to the Federal Circuit)