green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
3.4 score
“to prove discrimination, an employee must show that the employer knew of such employee's substantial physical or mental limitation(s)”
Treatment trajectory · 1997 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1997
2011
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Echevarria v. AstraZeneca, LP
to prove discrimination, an employee must show that the employer knew of such employee's substantial physical or mental limitation(s)
discussed
Cited "see"
Gazda v. Pioneer Chlor Alkali Co., Inc.
Ass’n v. Nederland, 101 F.3d 1095, 1099 (5th Cir.1996), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 2497 , 138 L.Ed.2d 1003 (1997); see Taylor v. Principal Financial Group, Inc., 93 F.3d 155, 161 (5th *665 Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 586 , 136 L.Ed.2d 515 (1996); Transamerica, 66 F.3d at 718-19 ; Forsyth v. Barr, 19 F.3d 1527, 1533 (5th Cir.1994).
discussed
Cited "see"
McGill v. Callear
See Taylor v. Principal Financial Group, Inc., 93 F.3d 155 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 586 , 136 L.Ed.2d 515 (1996); Gallagher v. Catto, 778 F.Supp. 570, 578 (D.D.C.1991), aff'd mem., 988 F.2d 1280 (D.C.Cir.1993).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Rittelmeyer v. Univ. of N. Carolina at Chapel Hill
See also Taylor v. Principal Financial Group, Inc. , 93 F.3d 155 , 165 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 519 U.S. 1029 , 117 S.Ct. 586 , 136 L.Ed.2d 515 (1996) (duty to launch interactive process is triggered by request for an accommodation).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Methodist Hospitals of Dallas
Although Chandler involved claims under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 ("the Rehabilitation Act”), 29 U.S.C. § 701 et seq., the Fifth Circuit has consistently held that case law interpreting the Rehabilitation Act is considered persuasive authority for interpreting the ADA because of the similarity between the statutes, See Chandler, 2 F.3d at 1391 & n.18; see also Taylor v. Principal Financial Group, Inc., 93 F.3d 155, 162 (5th Cir.) (" ‘Unless expressly stated otherwise, the standards applied in the ADA are not intended to be lesser than the standards applied under [the Rehabilitation A…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Rural Water System 1 v. City of Sioux Center
See, e.g., North *1001 Alamo Water Supply Corp. v. City of San Juan, Tex., 90 F.3d 910, 917 (5th Cir.1996) (“Section 1926(b) does not create or specify a remedy for the enforcement of violations, but an injunction has been the principal tool employed by the courts with which to enforce the statute and prevent violations,” citing Bear Creek Water Ass’n, Inc., 816 F.2d at 1059, and Jennings Water, Inc., 895 F.2d at 315 ), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 117 S.Ct. 586 , 136 L.Ed.2d 515 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. Browner
See, e.g., North Alamo Water Supply Corp. v. City of San Juan, 90 F.3d 910, 916 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 117 S.Ct. 586 , 136 L.Ed.2d 515 (1996) (an appellate court should invoke its discretion to review a purely legal issue not raised below when “a miscarriage of justice would result from [the court’s] failure to consider it).” For these reasons, we hold that the petitioner may not raise for the first time in this proceeding its argument that 42 U.S.C. § 7407 (d)(3)(D) required the EPA to act on Pennsylvania’s redesignation request within 18 months.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Southwestern Pennsylvania Growth Alliance v. Carol Browner
See, e.g., North Alamo Water Supply Corp. v. City of San Juan, 90 F.3d 910, 916 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 117 S.Ct. 586 , 136 L.Ed.2d 515 (1996) (an appellate court should invoke its discretion to review a purely legal issue not raised below when "a miscarriage of justice would result from [the court's] failure to consider it)." For these reasons, we hold that the petitioner may not raise for the first time in this proceeding its argument that 42 U.S.C. § 7407 (d)(3)(D) required the EPA to act on Pennsylvania's redesignation request within 18 months. 38 Moreover, even if we wer…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
McKey v. Occidental Chemical Corp.
“The determination of whether an individual has a disability is not necessarily based on the name or diagnosis of the impairment the person has, but rather on the effect of that impairment on the life of the individual.” 29 C.F.R. 1630.2(j), App. (1996); see also Taylor v. Principal Financial Group, Inc., 93 F.3d 155, 164 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 586 , 136 L.Ed.2d 515 (1996).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Lawrence
v.
Melissa Holdings, Inc.
v.
Melissa Holdings, Inc.
No. 96-671.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Dec 9, 1996.
Published
Citer courts: D. Puerto Rico (1)
C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.