Taylor, Carolyn v. Small, Lawrence M.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that placement on an improvement plan that did not affect pay grade or salary was not an adverse action
• holding that § 791 provides the exclusive avenue for relief under the Rehabilitation Act for federal employees
• holding that “[a]n employer may cure an adverse employment action . . . before that action is the subject of litigation”
• concluding that a delay in receiving employee performance evaluations did not constitute an adverse action because it did not affect plaintiff's grade or salary
• concluding that placement on a PIP did not constitute an “adverse employment action” because plaintiff did not present evidence suggesting the PIP affected her grade or salary
• holding that Section 3 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, codified at 29 U.S.C. § 794, “does not provide federal employees an alternative route for relief under the Rehabilitation Act”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).