5 U.S.C. § 7203
Handicapping condition
The President may prescribe rules which shall prohibit, as nearly as conditions of good administration warrant, discrimination because of handicapping condition in an Executive agency or in the competitive service with respect to a position the duties of which, in the opinion of the Office of Personnel Management, can be performed efficiently by an individual with a handicapping condition, except that the employment may not endanger the health or safety of the individual or others.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases, 1980–2018 · leading case: Braun v. U.S. Dep't of the Interior, 288 F. Supp. 3d 293 (D.C. Cir. 2018).
Braun v. U.S. Dep't of the Interior, 288 F. Supp. 3d 293 (D.C. Cir. 2018). “§ 3330 ; 2 5 U.S.C. § 7203 ; the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; criminal statutes dealing with false statements ( 18 U.”
Bey v. Bolger, 540 F. Supp. 910 (E.D. Pa. 1982). “Plaintiff has also asserted claims under four other provisions: the Anti-Discrimination in Federal Employment Act, 5 U.S.C. § 7203 ; Section 1003(b) of the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970, 39 U.”
Joachim v. Babbit, 60 F. Supp. 2d 581 (M.D. La. 1999). “Plaintiff asserts a disability discrimination claim on two separate statutory grounds: (i) 5 U.S.C. § 7203 and (ii) Sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended 29 U.”
Shirey v. Devine, 670 F.2d 1188 (D.C. Cir. 1982). “The current version of this statute simply grants the President power to promulgate rules prohibiting “discrimination because of handicapping condition * * 5 U.S.C. § 7203 (Supp. Ill 1979). At the time Mr.”
Braun v. U.S. Dep't of the Interior (D.D.C. 2018). “§ 3330 ;2 5 U.S.C. § 7203 ; the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; criminal statutes dealing with false statements ( 18 U.”
Applicability of Anti-Discrimination Statutes to the Presidio Trust (OLC 2004). “§ 7202 (2000),7 and disability, see 5 U.S.C. § 7203 (2000).8 See also 5 U.S.C.”
Layne v. Cleland, 499 F. Supp. 398 (E.D.N.Y 1980). “§ 794a by plaintiff, Wilton Layne, in which he alleges he was discharged by his employer, the United States Veterans Administration (“VA”) in violation of 5 U.S.C. § 7203 , 29 U.S.C. § 791 and 29 C.”
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.