U.S. Code » Title 42 » Chapter CHAPTER 62— INTERGOVERNMENTAL PERSONNEL PROGRAM › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER IV— GENERAL PROVISIONS

42 U.S.C. § 4767

Termination of grants

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar
Whenever the Office, after giving reasonable notice and opportunity for hearing to the State or general local government concerned, finds—(1) that a program or project has been so changed that it no longer complies with the provisions of this chapter; or(2) that in the operation of the program or project there is a failure to comply substantially with any such provision;the Office shall notify the State or general local government of its findings and no further payments may be made to such government by the Office until it is satisfied that such noncompliance has been, or will promptly be, corrected. However, the Office may authorize the continuance of payments to those projects approved under this chapter which are not involved in the noncompliance.(Pub. L. 91–648, title V, § 507, Jan. 5, 1971, 84 Stat. 1928; 1978 Reorg. Plan No. 2, § 102, eff. Jan. 1, 1979, 43 F.R. 36037, 92 Stat. 3783.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

This chapter, referred to in text, means the provisions of subchapters I, II, III, and IV of this chapter. See section 4761 of this title.

Executive DocumentsTransfer of Functions

“Office”, meaning Office of Personnel Management, substituted in text for “Commission”, meaning Civil Service Commission, pursuant to Reorg. Plan No. 2 of 1978, § 102, 43 F.R. 36037, 92 Stat. 3783, set out under section 1101 of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees, which transferred functions vested by statute in Civil Service Commission and Chairman thereof to Director of Office of Personnel Management (except as otherwise specified), effective Jan. 1, 1979, as provided by section 1–102 of Ex. Ord. No. 12107, Dec. 28, 1978, 44 F.R. 1055, set out under section 1101 of Title 5.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1984–1985 · leading case: John A. Canfield v. George M. Sullivan, James D. Dunn, Ronald A. Garzini & Fred Jones, 774 F.2d 1466 (9th Cir. 1985).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
John A. Canfield v. George M. Sullivan, James D. Dunn, Ronald A. Garzini & Fred Jones, 774 F.2d 1466 (9th Cir. 1985). “42 U.S.C. § 4767 . Since this court finds no evidence — clear, affirmative, or otherwise — of Congress’ intent to create a private right of action in the IPA, [plaintiff] has no claim under the IPA.”
Howkins v. Caldwell, 587 F. Supp. 98 (N.D. Ga. 1984). “42 U.S.C. § 4767 . Since this court finds no evidence — clear, affirmative, or otherwise — of Congress’ intent to create a private right of action in the IPA, Howkins has no claim under the IPA.”
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.