green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 20×
88.5 score
G Cite
cited 8× by 7 distinct cases, 2000–2026 · 6 courts ·
…for the accommodation of a reassignment to be reasonable, it is clear that a position must first exist and be vacant.
at p. 810
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1997 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1997
2011
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
University of Texas at San Antonio v. Damien Wilkerson
for the accommodation of a reassignment to be reasonable, it is clear that a position must first exist and be vacant.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
City of Pharr, Texas v. Heriberto De Leon
for the accommodation of a reassignment to be reasonable, it is clear that a position must first exist and be vacant. under the ada, an employer is not required to give what it does not have.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Allen v. USPS
(3×)
also: Cited as authority (quoted), Cited "see"
he ada does not require an employer to take action inconsistent with the contractual rights of other workers.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Bills v. Wal-Mart Stores East LP
for the accommodation of a reassignment to be reasonable, it is clear that a position must first exist and be vacant.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Cocke v. Lourdes Physician Group L L C
for the accommodation of a reassignment to be reasonable, it is clear that a position must first exist and be vacant.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Thompson v. Microsoft
under the ada, an employer is not required to give what it does not have.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Charles v. Wal-Mart Louisiana L L C
for the accommodation of a reassignment to be reasonable, it is clear that a position must first exist and be vacant.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Messenger v. Boston Scientific Corporation
for the accommodation of a reassignment to be reasonable, it is clear that a position must first exist and be vacant.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Ronald Gonzalez v. United Parcel Service
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
for the accommodation of a reassign- ment to be reasonable, it is clear that a position must first exist and be va- cant.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Robert Moss v. Harris Cty Constable Precinct, et a
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
for the accommodation of a reassignment to be reasonable, it is clear that a position must first exist and be vacant.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Franklin v. City of Slidell
(3×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
an employer is not required to create 'light duty' jobs to accommodate.
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Jenkins v. Guardian Industries Corp.
(4×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
for the accommodation of a reassignment to be reasonable, it is clear that a position must first exist and be vacant.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Davis v. Florida Power & Light Co.
(2×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
he ada does not require an employer to take action inconsistent with the contractual rights of other workers under a collective bargaining agreement.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Davis v. Florida Power & Light Co.
(2×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
he ada does not require an employer to take action inconsistent with the- contractual rights of other workers under a collective bargaining agreement.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Patterson v. Sawyer
we must affirm a judgment of the district court if the result is correct, even if our affirmance is upon grounds not relied upon by the district court.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Laurin v. Providence Hospital
he ada does not require an employer to take action inconsistent with the contractual rights of other workers under a .
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Laurin v. Providence Hospital
he ada does not require an employer to take action inconsistent with the contractual rights of other workers under a .
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Kralik v. Durbin
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
following the other circuits which have considered this issue, we hold that the ada does not require an employer to take action inconsistent with the contractual rights of other workers under a collective bargaining agreement.
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
Sutton v. United Air Lines, Inc.
(2×)
also: Cited as authority (rule)
the question is whether foreman was treated by as having an impairment that substantially limits a major life activity
discussed
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
M. FRANK RUSSELL; RENE W. VAN ZANTEN v. SANCHEZ-O’BRIEN OIL AND GAS CORPORATION
we must affirm a judgment of the district court if the result is correct, even if our affirmance is upon grounds not relied upon by the district court.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Brenyah v. Columbia Hospital
“An employer is not required to create ‘light duty’ jobs to accommodate.” Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d 800, 809 (5th Cir. 1997) (Turco v. Hoechst Celanese Chem.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
David Wayne Gibson Jr. v. American Travel Associates, ET AL.
Instead, it is a violation of the ADA only if the plaintiff establishes a prima facie case of failure to accommodate.”) (internal citations omitted); Murphy v. Sec'y, U.S. Dep't of Army, 769 F. App'x 779 , 782 (11th Cir. 2019) (stating that “[t]here is no independent cause of action for bad faith interactive process.”) 38 42 U.S.C. § 12102 (1). such tasks as “caring for oneself, performing manual tasks, walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, learning and working.”39 And a “qualified individual with a disability” is one with a “disability” who, “with or without reas…
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Brenyah v. Columbia Hospital Corporation of Bay Area
(D.E. 151, p. 70) (citing Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d 800, 809 (Sth Cir. 1997)); see also Burch, 174 F.3d at 621 (explaining that ADA does not require employer to modify job duties).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Moreno v. Microsoft Corporation
Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d 800, 808 (5th Cir. 1997) (“Thus, while the ADA focuses on eradicating barriers, the ADA does not relieve a disabled employee or applicant from the obligation to perform the essential functions of the job.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Vasquez v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.
See, e.g., Jones v. Kerrville State Hosp., 142 F.3d 263 , 265-66 (5th Cir. 1998) (reversing and rending on accommodation claim and noting that “[i]f the disabled person must be exempted from performance of an essential function of the job, then she is not otherwise qualified and not protected by the ADA.”); Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d 800, 809 (5th Cir. 1997); EEOC v. Amego, Inc., 110 F.3d 135, 144 (1st Cir. 1997).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Ray v. Columbia Brazoria Independent School District
(2×)
Defendants respond that being physically present in the classroom is an essential part of being a high school teacher, and thus if Plaintiff’s disability prevented her from teaching in person, she was not a “qualified individual with a disability.”3 “While the ADA focuses on eradicating barriers, the ADA does not relieve a disabled employee or applicant from the obligation to perform the essential functions of the job.” Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d 800, 808 (5th Cir. 1997).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Garza v. Energy Transfer Partners LLC
Appx. 419, 423 (5th Cir. 2014) (per curiam) (quoting Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d 800, 810 (5th Cir. 1997)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Alonzo v. Cajun Operating
Exch., Inc., 80 F.4th 607 , 615–16 (5th Cir. 2023) (quoting Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d 800, 804 (5th Cir. 1997)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Cyrilien v. TDCJ
Under the ADA, an employer is not required to give what it does not have.” Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d 800, 810 (5th Cir. 1997).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Rex Real Est I v. Rex Real Est
(2×)
Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d 800, 804 (5th Cir. 1997).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Davenport v. Federal Express
Substantively, “[a]n employer is not required to create ‘light duty’ jobs to accommodate.” Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d at 800, 809 (5th Cir. 1997) (quoting Turco v. Hoechst Celanese Chem.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Drake v. Spring Indep Sch Dist
“For the accommodation of a reassignment to be reasonable, it is clear that a position must first exist and be vacant.” Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d 800, 810 (5th Cir. 1997).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Atomanczyk v. Texas Department Of Criminal Justice
Foreman v Babcock & Wilcox Co, 117 F3d 800, 805 (5th Cir 1997), citing 29 CFR § 1630.2 (j)(1).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Weber v. BNSF Ry
Weber can establish that he is a qualified individual—and thus defeat summary judgment—if he can show “that a reasonable accommodation of his disability would have enabled him to perform the essential functions of the job.” 17 Reassignment may be a reasonable accommodation, but Weber “bears the burden of proving that an available position exists that he was qualified for and could, with reasonable accommodations, perform.” 18 Weber must offer evidence “showing that any of the requested positions are, or were, available” and showing that “he possesses the requisite skill, expe…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Campos v. Steves & Sons, Inc.
After all, “[u]nder the ADA, an employer is not required to give what it does not have,” Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d 800, 810 (5th Cir. 1997), and “a disabled employee has no right…to choose what job he will be assigned….” Jenkins v. Cleco Power, LLC, 487 F.3d 309, 315 (5th Cir. 2007).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Rios v. Grifols Biomat USA
“For the accommodation of a reassignment to be reasonable, it is clear that a position must first exist and be vacant.” Silva v. City of Hidalgo, Tex., 575 F. App’x. 419, 423 (5th Cir. 2014) (quoting Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d 800, 810 (5th Cir. 1997)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Davis v. Brennan
“For the accommodation of a reassignment to be reasonable, it is clear that a position must first exist and be vacant.” Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d 800, 810 (5th Cir. 1997).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Parker v. Benteler Steel
App’x. 377, 382 (5th Cir. 2012) (Summary judgment appropriate as employee could not perform “moderately heavy manual tasks” associated with operator position); Galvan v. City of Bryan, Tex., 367 F.Supp.2d 1081, 1091 (S.D.Tex.2004) (Summary judgment appropriate as employee could not operate the heavy equipment needed to perform the job of “Equipment Operator”); Ketcher v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 122 F.Supp.2d 747, 752-53 (S.D.Tex. 2000) (Summary judgment appropriate as employee failed to contradict defendant's evidence that his “dizziness” rendered him unable to operate a forklift,…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Armando Avila v. United Parcel Service, Inc.
Code § 21.128(c) (specifying that damages are not available if employer demonstrates good faith effort to supply reasonable workplace accommodation); Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d 800, 810 (5th Cir. 1997) (holding that ADA does not require employer to take action inconsistent with contractual rights of other workers under collective bargaining agreement).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Catherine Williams v. State of Louisiana
Co., 230 F.3d 828, 830 (5th Cir. 2000) (quoting Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d 800, 804 (5th Cir. 1997)); see also Fed.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Kristan Seibert v. Jackson County, Mississippi, et
This error, however, is not disposi-tive, as we “will affirm the district court if the result is correct, ‘even if ... affirmance is upon grounds not relied upon by the district court.’ ” Weiser-Brown, 801 F.3d at 525 (quoting Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d 800, 804 (5th Cir. 1997)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Tammie Wade v. Megan Brennan
“For the accommodation of a reassignment to be reasonable, it is clear that a position must first exist and be vacant.” Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d 800, 810 (5th Cir.1997).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Ariza v. Loomis Armored US, LLC
NO. 110-730, at 9 (2008); 7 see also Chevron U.S.A. v. Echazabal, 536 U.S. 73 , 85 n. 5, 122 S.Ct. 2045 , 2052 n. 5, 153 L.Ed.2d 82 (2002) (discussing ADA’s legislative history)- The ADA’s three discrete and equally valid definitions of disability compel a particular application of Rule 56 in this case of disability discrimination: Plaintiffs case can withstand summary judgment, for Plaintiff can ultimately win, so long as the evidence that cannot be disbelieved does not definitively preclude her from later demonstrating that Defendant regarded her as disabled and acted upon this perceptio…
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Weiser-Brown Operating Co. v. St. Paul Surplus Lines Insurance
(3×)
also: Cited "see"
“Judgment as a matter of law is proper after a party has been fully heard by the jury on a given issue, and ‘there is no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to have found for that party with respect to that issue.’ ” Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d 800, 804 (5th Cir.1997) (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 50(a)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Richard Cavada, Sr. v. John McHugh
Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d 800, 810 (5th Cir.1997) (“For the accommodation of a reassignment to be reasonable, it is clear that a position must first exist and be vacant.”).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Silva v. City of Hidalgo, Texas
“For the accommodation of a reassignment to be reasonable, it is clear that a position must first exist and be vacant.” Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d 800, 810 (5th Cir.1997).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Eugene Blackmon v. Warden Kukua
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
“Judgment as a matter of law is proper after a party has been fully heard by the jury on a given issue, and there is no legally sufficient evidentiary basis for a reasonable jury to have found for that party with respect to that issue.” Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d 800, 804 (5th Cir.1997) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted); see also Fed.R.CivP. 50(a). “[T]he court is to consider all of the evidence ... in the light most favorable to the non-movant, drawing all factual inferences in favor of the non-moving party, and leaving credibility determinations, the weighi…
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Mohammed Ghali v. United States
Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox Co., 117 F.3d 800, 804 (5th Cir.1997).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
John Jefferson, Jr. v. Millercoors, L.L.C.
Foreman v. Babcock & Wilcox, Co., 117 F.3d 800, 810 (5th Cir.1997). 8 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
F.3d 1402w 6 A.D. Cases 1523 , 10 Ndlr P 49 Earl Foreman
v.
The Babcock & Wilcox Company, Et Al
v.
The Babcock & Wilcox Company, Et Al
6 A.D. Cases 1523, 10 NDLR P 49
Earl FOREMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
The BABCOCK & WILCOX COMPANY, et al., Defendants,
The Babcock & Wilcox Company, Defendant-Appellee.
No. 96-60510.
United States Court of Appeals,
Fifth Circuit.
May 22, 1997.
NOTE: THE COURT HAS WITHDRAWN THIS OPINION