United States v. Schaltenbrand: government employee conflict of interest violations

United States of America, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Eugene Donald Schaltenbrand, Defendant-Appellant United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. 930 F.2d 1554. May 13, 1991

Key Facts

Defendant-Appellant Colonel Eugene Schaltenbrand was convicted of two violations of the government employee conflict of interest statutes. The first prohibited government employees from working on projects on which they had a financial interest. The second prohibited former government employees from representing private parties before the government regarding matters in which they previously worked for the government. Schaltenbrand, while still a member of the Air Force engaged in discussions with Teledyne Brown Engineering (TBE), a private contractor, informing them that he would like to work for TBE after his (soon-to-be announced) retirement. He even said that he would take a course in Spanish (one of the desired qualifications for the position). When he visited TBE while the organization was involved in negotiations with the government, Schaltenbrand was apparently on inactive duty. Schaltenbrand was a party to some of the talks while still a member of the Air Force but his status as a 'negotiator' was unclear. "Schaltenbrand argues that he had submitted an application to TBE, but TBE did not make him an offer until after he was finished with the Mexican Project" (687).

Holding of the Court

Schaltenbrand's petition for a rehearing was granted. His conviction on the first statute, prohibiting former government employees from representing private parties before the government on matters in which they previously worked for the government was upheld, but not the second statute which prohibited former government employees from representing private parties before the government on matters in which they previously worked for the government

Court's Rationale or Reasoning for its Decision

By offering himself to TBE, including offering to learn Spanish, the court deemed that he was clearly 'negotiating' with the organization while still an officer in violation of the first relevant statute. "Again, there is no dispute that Schaltenbrand had been an officer of the executive branch or that he was involved personally and substantially in the Mexican Project" (690). However, while the second statute prohibits acting as "agent or attorney for, or otherwise represent[ing]" an organization with which the agent worked previously as a member of a government, the term "agent is not defined in the statute" (690). The court "discovered no cases interpreting the term as it pertains to the statute" leading the court to conclude there was insufficient evidence that Schaltenbrand acted as an agent for TBE (690).