question because the mailing of the letter is described in both Sensing's Answers to Interrogatories and in her deposition testimony. This evidence, which we must read in the light most favorable to Sensing, is properly part of the summary judgment record. Thus, we rely on the May 27 letter as it is described in the deposition and interrogatories. 11 . See Guidelines: Employment Discrimination of [sic] the Basis of Handicap, available at http://www.mass.gov/mcad/disabilityla. html (hereinafter, "MCAD Guidelines”). 12 . Although there are differences between the two statutes and amidst the precedent interpreting them, see, e.g., Whitney, 258 F.3d at 32 n. 1 (examining differences with respect to treatment of "mitigating or corrective devi 273, 281, 107 S.Ct. 1123, 94 L.Ed.2d 307 (1987) (<HOLDING>). 15 . As explained, supra section II.B., the
holding that ajlcoholism is a handicapping condition within the meaning of the rehabilitation act holding that teacher with long dormant disease of tuberculosis that had recently reoccurred was handicapped within meaning of rehabilitation act holding under rehabilitation act that epileptics are handicapped individuals holding that plaintiff with obstructive airway disease and symptoms of fatigue headaches and myalgias is handicapped under the rehabilitation act holding rehabilitation act applicable