ADA claim (Kansas) · Go Syfert
← Kansas issues

ADA claim in Kansas

6 Kansas opinions name it 2 courts 2000–2017 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Kansas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (7)

CaseFollowedCited
Nusom v. Comh Woodburn, Inc.green
ca9 · 1997 · cited in 1 Kansas opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
1 sentence

2017See Nusom, 122 F.3d at 833-34 (plaintiff was entitled to attorney fees as prevailing party under Truth in Lending Act and Oregon's civil racketeering statute); Webb, 147 F.3d at 623 (court determined plaintiff had prevailed in his ADA claim, and therefore he could recover attorney fees under the ADA, which provides attorney fees to prevailing party).

11
Dennis Webb, Sr. v. Dick James and Dick James Ford, Inc., a Corporation of Illinoisgreen
ca7 · 1998 · cited in 1 Kansas opinions naming this issue, 2017–2017
1 sentence

2017See Nusom, 122 F.3d at 833-34 (plaintiff was entitled to attorney fees as prevailing party under Truth in Lending Act and Oregon's civil racketeering statute); Webb, 147 F.3d at 623 (court determined plaintiff had prevailed in his ADA claim, and therefore he could recover attorney fees under the ADA, which provides attorney fees to prevailing party).

11
Damron v. North Dakota Commissioner of Correctionsgreen
ndd · 2004 · cited in 1 Kansas opinions naming this issue, 2004–2004
2 sentences

2004See Damron v. North Dakota Com’r of Corrections, 299 F. Supp. 2d 970, 977 (D.N.D. 2004) (citing Layton v. Elder, 143 F.3d 469, 472 [8th Cir. 1998]).

2004See Damron v. North Dakota Com’r of Corrections, 299 F. Supp. 2d 970, 977 (D.N.D. 2004) (citing Layton v. Elder, 143 F.3d 469, 472 [8th Cir. 1998]).

11
Richard Ray Layton Billy R. Penny v. Ted Elder, as County Judge of Montgomery County, Arkansasgreen
ca8 · 1998 · cited in 1 Kansas opinions naming this issue, 2004–2004
2 sentences

2004See Damron v. North Dakota Com’r of Corrections, 299 F. Supp. 2d 970, 977 (D.N.D. 2004) (citing Layton v. Elder, 143 F.3d 469, 472 [8th Cir. 1998]).

2004See Damron v. North Dakota Com’r of Corrections, 299 F. Supp. 2d 970, 977 (D.N.D. 2004) (citing Layton v. Elder, 143 F.3d 469, 472 [8th Cir. 1998]).

11
Thrope v. State of Ohiogreen
ohsd · 1998 · cited in 1 Kansas opinions naming this issue, 2000–2000
2 sentences

2000Tenn. 1998) (noting that the “great weight of authority” has rejected states’ claims of immunity under the Eleventh Amendment when facing an ADA claim brought by a private citizen in federal court); Thrope v. State of Ohio, 19 F. Supp. 2d 816, 821-22 (S.D.

2000Tenn. 1998) (noting that the “great weight of authority” has rejected states’ claims of immunity under the Eleventh Amendment when facing an ADA claim brought by a private citizen in federal court); Thrope v. State of Ohio, 19 F. Supp. 2d 816, 821-22 (S.D.

11
Lamb v. John Umstead Hospitalgreen
nced · 1998 · cited in 1 Kansas opinions naming this issue, 2000–2000
2 sentences

2000Ohio 1998) (noting that the “clear majority” of courts have held that the ADA is a proper exercise of congressional power and holding that Ohio could not claim immunity pursuant to the Eleventh Amendment from a claim brought in a class action lawsuit); Lamb v. John Umstead Hosp., 19 F. Supp. 2d 498, 510 (E.D.

2000Ohio 1998) (noting that the “clear majority” of courts have held that the ADA is a proper exercise of congressional power and holding that Ohio could not claim immunity pursuant to the Eleventh Amendment from a claim brought in a class action lawsuit); Lamb v. John Umstead Hosp., 19 F. Supp. 2d 498, 510 (E.D.

11
Charlie Milton v. Scrivner, Inc., Gary Massey v. Scrivner, Inc.green
ca10 · 1995 · cited in 1 Kansas opinions naming this issue, 2000–2000
2 sentences

2000Second, if (but only if) we conclude that the individual is not able to perform the essential functions of the job, we must determine whether any reasonable accommodation by the employer would enable him to perform those functions.’ ” (Emphasis added.) Milton v. Scrivner, Inc., 53 F.3d 1118, 1123 (10th Cir. 1995) (quoting White, 45 F.3d at 360-61 ).

2000Second, if (but only if) we conclude that the individual is not able to perform the essential functions of the job, we must determine whether any reasonable accommodation by the employer would enable him to perform those functions.’ ” (Emphasis added.) Milton v. Scrivner, Inc., 53 F.3d 1118, 1123 (10th Cir. 1995) (quoting White, 45 F.3d at 360-61 ).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kansas. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (5)

CaseCitedYears
Rebarchek v. Farmers Cooperative Elevator & Mercantile Ass'n green
ksd · 1999
2 sentences

2001With regard to Rebarchek’s KAAD claim, the federal district court stated: “[T]he basis of this claim is the same as the ADA claim and the relevant KAAD provisions are virtually identical to the ADA, [thus] summary judgment is likewise appropriate on plaintiffs KAAD claim.” 60 F. Supp. 2d at 1153 .

2001With regard to Rebarchek’s KAAD claim, the federal district court stated: “[T]he basis of this claim is the same as the ADA claim and the relevant KAAD provisions are virtually identical to the ADA, [thus] summary judgment is likewise appropriate on plaintiffs KAAD claim.” 60 F. Supp. 2d at 1153 .

22001–2001
Allred v. Solaray, Inc. green
utd · 1997
2 sentences

2004Because an ADA claim is not a claim of injury to the person, but rather a claim of injury to the person’s rights or reputation, the court held ADA claims do not survive a plaintiffs death under Utah law. 971 F. Supp. at 1398 .

2004Because an ADA claim is not a claim of injury to the person, but rather a claim of injury to the person’s rights or reputation, the court held ADA claims do not survive a plaintiffs death under Utah law. 971 F. Supp. at 1398 .

12004–2004
Carter v. City of Emporia, Kan. green
ksd · 1982
2 sentences

2004Ruby, on the other hand, cites Carter v. City of Emporia, Kan., 543 F. Supp. 354 (D.

2004Ruby, on the other hand, cites Carter v. City of Emporia, Kan., 543 F. Supp. 354 (D.

12004–2004
Garrett v. University of AL green
ca11 · 1999
1 sentence

2000The United States Supreme Court has granted certiorari in Garrett v. University of Alabama, 193 F.3d 1214 , solely on the issue of whether Congress effectively abrogated the states’ immunity when it enacted the ADA.

12000–2000
David L. White v. York International Corporation green
ca10 · 1995
2 sentences

2000Second, if (but only if) we conclude that the individual is not able to perform the essential functions of the job, we must determine whether any reasonable accommodation by the employer would enable him to perform those functions.’ ” (Emphasis added.) Milton v. Scrivner, Inc., 53 F.3d 1118, 1123 (10th Cir. 1995) (quoting White, 45 F.3d at 360-61 ).

2000Second, if (but only if) we conclude that the individual is not able to perform the essential functions of the job, we must determine whether any reasonable accommodation by the employer would enable him to perform those functions.’ ” (Emphasis added.) Milton v. Scrivner, Inc., 53 F.3d 1118, 1123 (10th Cir. 1995) (quoting White, 45 F.3d at 360-61 ).

12000–2000

Statutes the citing opinions construe

USC § 42u.s.c.1983 (3)

Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.

Where else courts name it

CA 50 (1997–2025) CO 23 (1996–2026) TX 18 (1998–2021) MI 17 (1998–2026) NY 12 (1992–2025) NJ 10 (1997–2025) AZ 9 (1999–2025) CT 9 (1999–2022) IL 9 (1995–2021) MD 8 (2000–2025) NM 8 (1997–2025) NC 8 (2000–2017) OH 8 (1999–2022) WA 7 (1999–2025) KS 6 (2000–2017) IN 6 (2008–2018) MA 6 (1999–2024) IA 6 (1999–2018) PA 6 (2003–2026) MO 5 (2005–2025) WV 5 (1997–2019) LA 5 (1997–2021) AL 5 (1998–2013) MN 4 (1999–2026) UT 4 (2002–2022) ME 4 (2002–2023) TN 4 (1999–2006) VT 3 (2006–2026) HI 3 (2001–2002) VA 3 (2022–2026) FL 3 (2004–2013) MT 3 (2004–2016) GA 3 (2010–2021) NE 2 (2015–2015) DC 2 (2000–2001) WI 2 (2000–2007) ND 2 (2003–2009)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check