Morrison v. Department of Veterans Affairs, 675 F. App'x 981

Dr. Major Morrison, a former Marine and VA Boiler Plant Operator, was removed from his WG-10 position effective December 5, 2014; he appealed to the MSPB.
On March 26, 2015, Morrison and the VA executed a written Settlement Agreement that canceled the removal, reassigned him to a WG-5 Motor Vehicle Operator position, restored status quo ante with backpay and benefits, and provided $7,000 in compensatory damages.
The Board dismissed Morrison’s appeal based on the Settlement Agreement on April 8, 2015.
Morrison later filed a petition for enforcement, alleging the VA breached the settlement (claiming he should have been restored to Boiler Plant Operator and paid $14,000, and asserting race-based removal and duress in signing).
The MSPB ordered clarification of which settlement terms were disputed; after Morrison’s submissions the Board found no breach and denied enforcement on June 29, 2016; the decision became final August 3, 2016.
Morrison timely petitioned this court for review; the Federal Circuit affirms the Board, finding substantial evidence supports the Board’s interpretation and no legal error.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the VA breached the Settlement Agreement	Morrison: VA failed to comply — he was not reinstated to Boiler Plant Operator and was paid only $7,000 instead of $14,000	VA: The written Settlement Agreement controls; it does not promise reinstatement to the WG-10 post or $14,000, only $7,000 and reassignment to WG-5	Held: Agreement provides $7,000 and WG-5 reassignment; no breach found
Whether the Board erred by failing to hold a hearing in the enforcement proceeding	Morrison: Board should have provided a hearing to resolve disputes	VA/Board: Hearing discretionary; judge may convene one only if necessary	Held: No abuse of discretion in not holding a hearing given the record
Whether Morrison signed the Settlement Agreement under duress/was coerced	Morrison: He signed under protest/duress	VA: Agreement states it was entered freely and voluntarily; Morrison provided no evidence of duress	Held: Board correctly found the agreement was voluntarily entered into
Whether the Board rushed the case or failed to consider relevant facts (e.g., race claim)	Morrison: Board motivated to close case quickly and failed to consider his race-based removal allegation	VA/Board: Board sought clarification, prolonged proceedings for detail, and the settlement resolved underlying merits	Held: No evidence of improper motivation; underlying discrimination claim was resolved by the settlement and not before the court

Jones v. Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 834 F.3d 1361 (Fed. Cir.) (substantial-evidence standard explained)
Cleaton v. Dep’t of Justice, 839 F.3d 1126 (Fed. Cir.) (standards of review for MSPB decisions)