How have courts dealt with claims under the Rehabilitation Act and other federal rehabilitation legislation?

Two decisions under the Rehabilitation Act are particularly noteworthy. In Tudyman v. United Airlines (C.D.Cal.1984) 608 F.Supp. 739, a male applicant for a position as a flight attendant was rejected because he exceeded the [5 Cal.4th 1064] airline's body weight guidelines. He sued, claiming that he had been denied employment on the basis of a handicap under the Rehabilitation Act. His weight was apparently the result of extensive body building, resulting in a low percentage of body fat and a high percentage of muscle. (Id. at p. 741.) The court granted summary judgment for the airline, observing that the applicant's condition was not the result of a physiological disorder affecting one or more of the body's systems, "e.g., the result of a glandular problem," but rather was "self-imposed and voluntary." (Id. at p. 746.) Accordingly, he failed to meet the definition of a handicapped individual under the federal statute.