green
Positive treatment
4.5 score
Treatment trajectory · 1998 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1998
2012
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 12 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
cited
Cited "see"
Frehling Enterprises, Inc. v. International Select Group, Inc.
See Shahar v. Bowers, 120 F.3d 211, 212 (11th Cir.1997)(en banc), cert. denied,- U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 693 , 139 L.Ed.2d 638 (1998).
cited
Cited "see"
Frehling v. International Select
See Shahar v. Bowers, 120 F.3d 211, 212 (11th Cir. 1997)(en banc), cert. denied, 118 S. Ct. 693 (1998).
discussed
Cited "see"
Mistretta v. Volusia County Department of Corrections
See Doane v. City of Omaha, 115 F.3d 624, 627-28 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1162 , 118 S.Ct. 693 , 139 L.Ed.2d 638 (1998); Arnold v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 136 F.3d 854, 866 (1st Cir.1998); Holihan v. Lucky Stores, Inc., 87 F.3d 362, 366 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1162 , 117 S.Ct. 1349 , 137 L.Ed.2d 506 (1997); Matczak v. Frankford Candy & Chocolate *1262 Co., 136 F.3d 933, 937 (3d Cir.1997); Roth v. Lutheran General Hospital, 57 F.3d 1446, 1454 (7th Cir.1995).
cited
Cited "see"
LaChance v. Duffy's Draft House, Inc.
See id. at 1425 (Rafeedie, J., concurring). 15 . 115 F.3d 624 (8th Cir.1997), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 693 , 139 L.Ed.2d 638 (1998). 16 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Matusick v. Erie County Water Authority
In the public employer context, others have applied the balancing test set out by the Supreme Court in Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563, 566-68 , 88 S.Ct. 1731 , 20 L.Ed.2d 811 (1968), in order to weigh the relative interests of the plaintiff in preserving an intimate relationship and the interests of the state in “promoting the efficiency of the public services it performs through its employees.” Id. at 568 , 88 S.Ct. 1731 ; see, e.g., Shahar v. Bowers, 114 F.3d 1097, 1103 (11th Cir.1997) (en banc), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1049 , 118 S.Ct. 693 , 139 L.Ed.2d 638 (1998).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Matusick v. Erie County Water Authority
In the public employer context, others have applied the balancing test set out by the Supreme Court in Pickering v. Board of Education, 391 U.S. 563, 566-68 , 88 S.Ct. 1731 , 20 L.Ed.2d 811 (1968), in order to weigh the relative interests of the plaintiff in preserving an intimate relationship and the interests of the state in “promoting the efficiency of the public services it performs through its employees.” Id. at 568 , 88 S.Ct. 1731 ; see, e.g., Shahar v. Bowers, 114 F.3d 1097, 1103 (11th Cir.1997) (en banc), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 1049 , 118 S.Ct. 693 , 139 L.Ed.2d 638 (1998).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Ross v. Clayton County, Georgia
Pickering requires the district court to balance the interest of the public employee in exercising his right of free speech or association against the “interest of the State, as an employer, in promoting the efficiency of the public services it performs through its employees.” Id. at 568, 88 S. Ct. at 1734-35 ; see also Shahar v. Bowers, 114 F.3d 1097, 1112 (11th Cir. 1997) (en banc) (Tjoflat, J., specially concurring) (“Pickering balancing, in the public employment context, involves the weighing of the employee’s interest in the exercise of a constitutional right against the employer�…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Ross v. Clayton County
Pickering requires the district court to balance the interest of the public employee in exercising his right of free speech or association against the "interest of the State, as an employer, in promoting the efficiency of the public services it performs through its employees." Id. at 568 , 88 S.Ct. at 1734-35 ; see also Shahar v. Bowers, 114 F.3d 1097, 1112 (11th Cir.1997) (en banc) (Tjoflat, J., specially concurring) ("Pickering balancing, in the public employment context, involves the weighing of the employee's interest in the exercise of a constitutional right against the employer's interes…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Ross v. Clayton County, Georgia
Pickering requires the district court to balance the interest of the public employee in exercising his right of free speech or association against the “interest of the State, as an employer, in promoting the efficiency of the public services it performs through its employees.” Id. at 568 , 88 S.Ct. at 1734-35 ; see also Shahar v. Bowers, 114 F.3d 1097, 1112 (11th Cir.1997) (en banc) (Tjoflat, J., specially concurring) (“Pickering balancing, in the public employment context, involves the weighing of the employee’s interest in the exercise of a constitutional right against the employer�…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Joyce Workman, Plaintiff-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Frito-Lay, Inc., Defendant-Appellant/cross-Appellee
(2×)
See, e.g., Doane v. City of Omaha, 115 F.3d 624 (8th Cir.1997), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 693 , 139 L.Ed.2d 638 (1998); Harris v. H & W Contracting Co., 102 F.3d 516 (11th Cir.1996).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Erjavac v. Holy Family Health Plus
See, e.g., Doane v. City of Omaha, 115 F.3d 624 (8th Cir.) (EEOC guidelines require that police officer's glaucoma be evaluated without regard to corrective measures), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 118 S.Ct. 693 , 139 L.Ed.2d 638 (1998); Harris v. H & W Contracting Co., 102 F.3d 516 (11th Cir.1996) (applying EEOC guidelines to hold thyroid condition, although fully controlled by medication, was nonetheless substantially limiting in its unmedicated state); Holihan v. Lucky Stores, Inc., 87 F.3d 362 (9th Cir.1996) (upholding EEOC guidelines and holding that mitigating measures should not factor into w…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Barbara Davidson v. Midelfort Clinic, Ltd.
Pt. 1630, App. § 1630.2(j) (Interpretive Guidance) (“If an individual is substantially limited in any other major life activity, no determination should be made as to whether the individual is substantially limited in working.”); 2 EEOC Compliance Manual ¶ 6884, § 902.4(c), at 5312 (same); see also Doane v. City of Omaha, 115 F.3d 624, 628 (8th Cir.1997), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 118 S.Ct. 693 , — L.Ed.2d - (1997).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
City of Omaha
v.
Doane
v.
Doane
No. 97-738.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 12, 1998.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
C. A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied.