Kight v. United States
850 F. Supp. 2d 165
D.D.C.2012Background
- Kight enlisted March 13, 1995 and was injured in basic training, with ongoing back problems.
- He received counseling for disciplinary and motivational issues between Aug–Sept 1995 and August 1995, including threats of UCMJ action.
- On March 4, 1996, Kight elected discharge in lieu of a court-martial (OTH) after warnings and counsel; he was discharged March 29, 1996 under OTH with reentry code 3 and separation code KFS.
- Kight sought upgrades to the discharge character via ABCMR; initial denial in 1998, ADRB denial in 2007, and ABCMR denial in 2011.
- Kight alleged lack of due process, unequal consideration, and requests for equity; the court granted the government’s summary judgment and denied Kight’s cross-motion.
- Court reviewed under APA deferential standard, focusing on whether the administrative record supports the ABCMR’s decision and whether it was rational and not arbitrary.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was Kight’s resignation voluntary? | Kight contends duress during coercive conditions. | Board properly found voluntary discharge under applicable regulations. | Yes; resignation deemed voluntary; Board’s finding supported by substantial evidence. |
| Was the ABCMR’s decision supported by substantial evidence? | ABC MR ignored or minimized evidence supporting equity and injury claims. | ABCMR reasonably weighed evidence; not required to escalate to equity. | Yes; decision supported by substantial evidence and not arbitrary. |
Key Cases Cited
- Veitch v. England, 471 F.3d 124 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (duress standard not met; voluntary resignation valid despite court-mmartial options)
- Walker v. Shannon, 848 F. Supp. 250 (D.D.C. 1994) (court does not reweigh evidence; must assess if evidence supports the decision)
- Frizelle v. Slater, 111 F.3d 172 (D.C. Cir. 1997) (arbitrary and capricious review requires rational connection to facts)
- Roth v. United States, 378 F.3d 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2004) (review of correction boards under APA for evidence supporting merit)
- Wilson v. McHugh, — F. Supp. 2d — (D.D.C. 2012) (APA review of ABCMR with substantial deference)