C.F.R. » Title 5 » CHAPTER I—OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT › SUBCHAPTER B—CIVIL SERVICE REGULATIONS › PART 297—PRIVACY PROCEDURES FOR PERSONNEL RECORDS › Subpart B—Request for Access

5 C.F.R. § 297.203

Access by the parent of a minor or by the legal guardian of an individual declared to be incompetent

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) A parent, legal guardian, or custodian of a minor, upon presentation of suitable personal identification, may access on behalf of a minor any record pertaining to the minor in a system of records maintained by the Office.

(b) A legal guardian, upon presentation of documentation establishing guardianship, may access on behalf of an individual declared to be incompetent by a court of competent jurisdiction, any record pertaining to that individual in a system of records maintained by the Office.

(c) Minors are not precluded from exercising personally those rights provided them by the Privacy Act.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1982–1988 · leading case: Margaret Daly-Murphy v. Michael Winston, E. Carmack Holmes, Arthur S. Kling, Ronald L. Nelson & the Vets. Admin., 837 F.2d 348 (9th Cir. 1988).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Margaret Daly-Murphy v. Michael Winston, E. Carmack Holmes, Arthur S. Kling, Ronald L. Nelson & the Vets. Admin., 837 F.2d 348 (9th Cir. 1988). · cites it 2× “Appellees maintain that Daly-Murphy is not currently entitled to the transcript because she has not yet made a proper request for it under 5 C.F.R. § 297.203 (1986). We need not decide whether the transcript of the hearings on Daly-Murphy’s suspension is a “medical quality…”
Jack C. Stoller v. John O. Marsh, Jr., Sec'y of the Army, 682 F.2d 971 (D.C. Cir. 1982). “§ 552a(d)(1) (1976); 5 C.F.R. § 297.203 (a) (1982). 14 Upon the employee’s request, the agency must either make any correction of any portion of the record which he believes is “not accurate, relevant, timely, or complete,” or give reasons for its refusal.”
Margaret Daly-Murphy v. Michael Winston, E. Carmack Holmes, Arthur S. Kling, Ronald L. Nelson & the Vets. Admin., 820 F.2d 1470 (9th Cir. 1987). “A review of the record reveals that Daly-Murphy has indeed failed to make the request mandated by 5 C.F.R. § 297.203 . Entitlement to a document under the Privacy Act cannot be established absent the prescribed request.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.