Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
3 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 21 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from Louis Holiday v. City of Chattanooga.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Louis Holiday v. City of Chattanooga Anchor | green | “the individual's actual medical condition, and the impact, if any, the condition might have on that individual's ability to perform the job in question.” | 8 |
| 2 | Louis Holiday v. City of Chattanooga | green | “the ada mandates an individualized inquiry in determining whether an employee's disability or other condition disqualifies him from a particular position.” | 8 |
| 3 | Nicholas Keith v. County of Oakland | green | “a proper evaluation involves consideration of the applicant's personal characteristics, his actual medical condition, and the effect, if any, the condition may have on his ability to perform the job in question.” | 5 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.