ALLcrimesfood&drugstaxestelecomcommercehealthconservationtransportationagricultureveteransbrowse all titles »
0

31 U.S.C. § 755 — Judicial review

submitted 44 years ago by Pub. L. 97-258 to r/title-31-MONEY-AND-FINANCE · 187 words · no verdicts yet

in plain englishAI-generated · not legal advice

Certain final decisions may be reviewed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The court must set aside a decision that is legally defective, procedurally improper, or unsupported by substantial evidence; a prevailing party in certain discrimination cases may receive attorney’s fees.

(a) A final decision under section 753(a)(1)–(3), (6), (7), or (9) may be reviewed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Chapter 158 of title 28 applies, except that the petition for review must be filed within 30 days after the petitioner receives notice of the decision. The court must set aside a final decision if it finds that the decision is—(1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise inconsistent with law; (2) not made using required procedures; or (3) unsupported by substantial evidence.

(b) If an officer, employee, job applicant, or employee of the Architect of the Capitol, the Botanic Garden, or the Senate Restaurants wins a proceeding under this section, and the decision is based on a finding of discrimination prohibited under section 732(f) or section 312(e)(2) of the Architect of the Capitol Human Resources Act, the court may allow attorney’s fees under the standards in section 706(k) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

the actual law source: uscode.house.gov ↗public domain
(a)

A final decision under section 753(a)(1)–(3), (6),,1 (7) or (9) of this title may be reviewed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Chapter 158 of title 28 applies to a review under this subchapter, except the petition for review shall be filed by the 30th day after the petitioner receives notice of the decision. The court shall set aside a final decision the court decides is—

(1)

arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not consistent with law;

(2)

not made consistent with required procedures; or

(3)

unsupported by substantial evidence.

(b)

If an officer, employee, applicant for employment, or employee of the Architect of the Capitol, the Botanic Garden, or the Senate Restaurants is the prevailing party in a proceeding under this section, and the decision is based on a finding of discrimination prohibited under section 732(f) of this title or under section 312(e)(2) 2 of the Architect of the Capitol Human Resources Act, attorney’s fees may be allowed by the court in accordance with the standards prescribed under section 706(k) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Source credit: (Pub. L. 97–258, Sept. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 902; Pub. L. 98–216, § 1(1), Feb. 14, 1984, 98 Stat. 3; Pub. L. 100–426, title I, § 103(a), (b), Sept. 9, 1988, 102 Stat. 1599; Pub. L. 103–283, title III, § 312(e)(4)(C), July 22, 1994, 108 Stat. 1446.)

history & why it existsrecord from the source credit
  • 1982Enacted · Pub. L. 97-258 · 96 Stat. 902
  • 1984Amended · Pub. L. 98-216 · 98 Stat. 3
  • 1988Amended · Pub. L. 100-426 · 102 Stat. 1599
  • 1994Amended · Pub. L. 103-283 · 108 Stat. 1446

A history note hasn’t been published yet. The record shows enactment by Pub. L. 97-258 on 1982-09-13.

all 0 arguments · sorted by: best

0/280

no arguments yet — make the first case