5 U.S.C. § 8129
Recovery of overpayments
Historical and Revision Notes | ||
|---|---|---|
Derivation | U.S. Code | Revised Statutes and Statutes at Large |
| ||
In subsection (a), the words “Subject to the provisions of sections 786 and 787 of this title” and “if any” are omitted as surplusage.
In subsection (c), the word “official” is substituted for “officer” as the definition of “officer” in section 2104 excludes a member of a uniformed service.
Administration of this subchapter was transferred to the Secretary of Labor by section 1 of 1950 Reorg. Plan No. 19, 64 Stat. 1271 (see section 8145).
Standard changes are made to conform with the definitions applicable and the style of this title as outlined in the preface to the report.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12
cases, 1980–2012 · leading case: In Re Howell, 4 B.R. 102 (Bankr. M.D. Tenn. 1980).
In Re Howell, 4 B.R. 102 (Bankr. M.D. Tenn. 1980). “Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 8129 (a) 1 a determination of overpayment was made and pursuant to regulations it was determined that $400 monthly should be withheld from debtor’s monthly disability benefits.”
United States v. Alfred Sforza & Josephine Sforza, 326 F.3d 107 (2d Cir. 2003). “Specifically, they contend that jurisdiction under the FCA is precluded by 5 U.S.C. § 8129 , which allows OWCP to recover “overpayments,” and by § 8148, which triggers the “forfeit[ure]” of entitlement in certain circumstances.”
United States v. Webber, 536 F.3d 584 (7th Cir. 2008). “(b) Where the right to compensation is forfeited, OWCP shall recover any compensation already paid for the period of forfeiture pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 8129 and other relevant statutes.”
Gallucci v. Chao, 374 F. Supp. 2d 121 (D.D.C. 2005). “” 5 U.S.C. § 8129 (a) (2000). The Secretary of Labor may “review an award for or against payment of compensation at any time on [her] own motion or on application.”
Brumley v. United States, 55 Fed. Cl. 431 (Fed. Cl. 2003). “” See 5 U.S.C. § 8129 . The Office also issued an order terminating plaintiffs future benefits.”
Scott Beemer v. Eric Holder, Jr., 495 F. App'x 396 (5th Cir. 2012). “” 5 U.S.C. § 8129 . A claimant opposing an overpayment determination has the right to present evidence in writing or at a hearing before the OWCP issues a final decision.”
United States v. Carpentieri, 23 F. Supp. 2d 433 (S.D.N.Y. 1998). “§ 8148 ; (b) recoupment of overpayment of FECA benefits upon OWCP’s finding that an overpayment was made under 5 U.S.C. § 8129 ; and (c) forfeiture of the right to compensation where a claimant provides false information regarding earnings from employment sources under 5 U.”
United States v. Vetti, 681 F. Supp. 986 (D. Conn. 1988). “By representing that his medical problems were job related, defendant was found to have violated 5 U.S.C. § 8129 (a). 3 “On July 23,1985 OWCP moved the ECAB to remand for a further hearing as there had been an incorrect finding as to [defendant’s] fault.”
Schrader v. Hercules, Inc., 489 F. Supp. 159 (W.D. Va. 1980). “5 U.S.C. § 8129 . That express recognition cannot be ignored by the courts.”
Int'l Union, United Auto., Aerospace & Agric. Implement Workers of Am. v. Dole, 919 F.2d 753 (D.C. Cir. 1990). “The Federal Employee's Compensation Act, 5 U.S.C. § 8129 (b), includes two criteria in its "equity and good conscience” determination: (1) "severe” financial hardship or (2) detrimental reliance.”
United States v. Webber, Vickie (7th Cir. 2008). “(b) Where the right to compensation is forfeited, OWCP shall recover any compensation already paid for the period of forfeiture pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 8129 and other relevant statutes.”
Kendall v. Brock, 689 F. Supp. 354 (D. Vt. 1987). “5 U.S.C. § 8129 . Furthermore, under Bulletin 86-85 claimants are notified of the fact of referral to an impartial specialist and are informed that the record contains conflicting medical evidence.”
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.