Barth v. Gelb
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Colombia Circuit
2 F.3d 1180 (1993)
- Written by Alexander Hager-DeMyer, JD
Facts
Donald Barth (plaintiff) was a computer specialist with an advanced and degenerative form of diabetes that required care from various specialists to control. Barth was employed by Voice of America (VOA) (defendant), a broadcasting organization under the United States Information Agency (defendant). Barth applied to join the permanent Foreign Service of the State Department, which staffed VOA’s overseas radio relay program. Barth failed the state department’s required medical-clearance exam, and the state department determined that Barth could not serve worldwide and could work only in locations with advanced medical facilities due to his condition. The VOA program staffed 12 overseas stations with 70 people, and most of the stations were located in remote areas. Due to the medical-facility needs, Barth would have been able to staff only three or four posts. Barth requested a medical waiver from VOA that would allow him to join the program and serve only in the few locations near sufficient medical facilities. VOA denied the waiver, and Barth filed suit in federal district court, claiming that VOA violated the Rehabilitation Act. The district court found in favor of VOA. Barth appealed to the District of Colombia Circuit, arguing that VOA’s denial of the waiver constituted a withholding of reasonable accommodations and disability discrimination.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Buckley, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
