John Kameraun Cameron v. McI, 28 F.3d 1208 (4th Cir. 1994). · Go Syfert
Search
John Kameraun Cameron v. McI, 28 F.3d 1208 (4th Cir. 1994). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“a required element of a claim for violation of the rehabilitation act is a showing that an employee's handicap is the sole reason for the employer's action.”
35 citation events (8 in the last 25 years) across 10 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Astrid McElroy v. The Bibb County Health Care Authority, d/b/a Bibb Medical Center (alnd, 2026-06-23)
Treatment trajectory · 1994 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1994 2010 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Astrid McElroy v. The Bibb County Health Care Authority, d/b/a Bibb Medical Center
N.D. Ala. · 2026 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
ffers to reduce the number of working saturdays to as few as possible would not accommodate an employee whose religion prohibits working on any saturday.
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Tia Moore Wilson v. Peter B. Hegseth
E.D. Va. · 2026 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
a required element of a claim for violation of the rehabilitation act is a showing that an employee's handicap is the sole reason for the employer's action.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Stallings v. Ferrera
E.D. Cal. · 2025 · confidence medium
Therefore, “[a] supervisor can be liable in his 25 individual capacity for his own culpable action or inaction in the training, supervision, or 26 control of his subordinates; for his acquiescence in the constitutional deprivation; or for 27 conduct that showed a reckless or callous indifference to the rights of others.” Starr, 652 28 F.3d at 1208. 1 V.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) (HC) Sho v. S.F. Field Office, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
E.D. Cal. · 2023 · confidence medium
Analysis 24 A. Individual’s Interest 25 Petitioner has an indisputably significant interest in “[f]reedom from imprisonment—from 26 government custody, detention, or other forms of physical restraint.” Zadvydas, 533 U.S. at 690 . 27 The interest in “freedom from prolonged detention” is “unquestionably substantial.” Singh, 638 28 F.3d at 1208.
cited Cited as authority (rule) United States v. Roy Young
7th Cir. · 2002 · confidence medium
Lakich, 28 F.3d at 1208.
discussed Cited "see" Logan v. Organic Harvest LLC
N.D. Ala. · 2020 · signal: see · confidence high
See Benton v. Carded Graphics, Inc., 28 F.3d 1208 (4th Cir. 1994) (“[O]ffers to reduce the number of working Saturdays to as few 4 The undersigned refers to the “purported” neutral rotating shift system because it is not clear why Boggan worked only two Saturdays between October 26, 2016, and February 10, 2017, if the system generally required employees to work every other Saturday.
discussed Cited "see" In re Coffman
11th Cir. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
See In re Burgess, 28 F.3d 1208 , 1208 (4th Cir.1994) (“Because the record in this case has been lost in the district court, we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, but deny the petition for writ of mandamus without prejudice.
cited Cited "see" Copley v. Arch of WV Inc
4th Cir. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See Copley v. Arch of West Virginia, Inc., 28 F.3d 1208 (4th Cir. 1994) (unpublished opinion); see also Sterling Smokeless Coal Co. v. Akers, 1997 WL 772847 at *1-2 (4th Cir. 1997).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
John Kameraun Cameron
v.
McI
94-6214.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Jun 20, 1994.
28 F.3d 1208
Unpublished
2 passages pin-cited by 2 cases

28 F.3d 1208

NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth Circuit.
John Kameraun CAMERON, Plaintiff Appellant,
v.
MCI-H, Defendant Appellee.

No. 94-6214.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fourth Circuit.

Submitted May 24, 1994.
Decided June 20, 1994.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, District Judge. (CA-94-210-L)

John Kameraun Cameron, Appellant Pro Se.

D.Md.

AFFIRMED.

Before WIDENER, WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, C.J.

PER CURIAM:

1

Appellant appeals from the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983 (1988) claim as frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1915(d) (1988). Our review of the record and the district court's opinion discloses no abuse of discretion and that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED