O.C.G.A.
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the ‘‘Georgia Equal Employment for Persons With Disabilities Code.’’
History
(Code 1933, § 66-501, enacted by Ga. L. 1981, p. 1803, § 2; Ga. L. 1995, p. 1302, § 4.)
Annotations
Law reviews. - For survey of 1987 Eleventh Circuit cases on constitutional
law - civil, see 39 Mercer L. Rev. 1169 (1988).
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Cited in Humphreys v. Riverside Mfg. Co., 169 Ga. App. 18, 311 S.E.2d 223 (1983); Johnson v. Kut Kwick Corp., 620 F.
Supp. 748 (S.D. Ga. 1984); Veal v. Memorial Hosp., 894 F. Supp. 448 (M.D. Ga. 1995).
RESEARCH REFERENCES ALR. - Visual impairment as handicap or disability under state employment discrimination law, 77 ALR5th 595. Who is ‘‘qualified individual’’ under Americans with Disabilities Act provisions defining and extending protection against employment discrimination to qualified individual with disability (42 U.S.C.A. §§ 12111(8), 12112(a)), 146 ALR Fed. 1. What constitutes federal financial assistance for purposes of § 504 of Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C.A. § 794), which pro-
hibits any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance from discriminating on basis of disability, 147 ALR Fed. 205. Action under Americans with Disabilities Act (42 U.S.C.A. § 12101 et seq.) to remedy alleged harassment or hostile work environment, 162 ALR Fed. 603. What constitutes employment discrimination by public entity in violation of Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C.A. § 12132, 164 ALR Fed. 433.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
24
cases (
6 in the last 5 years), 1984–2024 · leading case:
Farrell v. Time Serv., Inc., 178 F. Supp. 2d 1295 (N.D. Ga. 2001).
Farrell v. Time Serv., Inc., 178 F. Supp. 2d 1295 (N.D. Ga. 2001).
· cites it 6× “Plaintiff seeks damages and equitable relief pursuant to the Georgia Equal Employment for Persons With Disabilities Code, O.C.G.A. § 34-6A-1 et seq. She also seeks compensatory damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress and negligent hiring, retention, or…”
Borden v. Johnson, 395 S.E.2d 628 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990).
· cites it 6× “its the discharge of any employee because his earnings have been subjected to garnishment for any one indebtedness); OCGA § 34-1-2 (which criminalizes the discharge of employees on the basis of age); OCGA § 34-1-3 (which authorizes an employee who was discharged for attending a…”
Henrickson v. Pain Control & Rehab. Inst. of Georgia, Inc., 424 S.E.2d 27 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992).
· cites it 12× “OCGA § 34-6A-1 et seq. prohibits discrimination in the employment of handicapped individuals and must, therefore, certainly be deemed the “most analogous” state statute to appellant’s specific claim under 29 USCA § 794.”
Richardson v. Hennly, 434 S.E.2d 772 (Ga. Ct. App. 1993).
· cites it 4× “, alleging violation of the Georgia Equal Employment for the Handi *869 capped Code, OCGA § 34-6A-1 et seq., battery, and intentional infliction of emotional harm.”
Daugherty v. Metro. Atlanta Rapid Transit Auth., 371 S.E.2d 677 (Ga. Ct. App. 1988).
· cites it 8× “, seeking damages for medical malpractice and tortious interference with his employment based on a medical opinion the latter had given to MARTA, upon which MARTA had relied in discharging him.”
Hennly v. Richardson, 444 S.E.2d 317 (Ga. 1994).
· cites it 2× “First Federal also maintains that it was entitled to summary judgment on Richardson’s claim that it violated the GEEHC, OCGA § 34-6A-1 et seq., because Richardson does not meet the definition of “handicapped” under that statute.”
Scott v. Shoe Show, Inc., 38 F. Supp. 3d 1343 (N.D. Ga. 2014).
· cites it 2× “Scott filed this action against Shoe Show, Kevin Broome ("Broome”), and Brenda Greser ("Greser”), alleging discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation under Title VII and the ADA; discrimination and retaliation under the Georgia Equal Employment for Persons with…”
Bowers v. Estep, 420 S.E.2d 336 (Ga. Ct. App. 1992).
· cites it 2× “Bowers’ employer, and his supervisors David Estep and Donald Adams, seeking to recover compensatory and punitive damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress, violation of provisions of the Georgia Equal Employment for the Handicapped Code, OCGA § 34-6A-1 et seq.…”
Allen v. Bergman, 412 S.E.2d 549 (Ga. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 2× “A90A1320), wherein the court affirmed the grant of summary judgment in favor of appellees as to the claim of violation of the Georgia Equal Employment for the Handicapped Code (GEEHC), OCGA § 34-6A-1, and reversed on procedural grounds (that is, due to the absence of any…”
Henrickson v. Sammons, 434 S.E.2d 51 (Ga. 1993).
· cites it 2× “[I]t would be anomalous to hold that a handicapped individual who can predicate his claim of employment discrimination upon 29 USCA § 794, because of the fortuitous existence of Federal financial assistance, would be subject to a different statute of limitations than would the…”
Garrett v. K-Mart Corp., 398 S.E.2d 302 (Ga. Ct. App. 1990).
· cites it 2× “Finally, to the extent that appellant’s pleadings may be construed to assert a cause of action under the Georgia Equal Employment for the Handicapped Code, OCGA § 34-6A-1 et seq., it appears that even if appellant qualifies as a handicapped person under OCGA § 34-6A-2 (2), a…”
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.