5 canonical passages across 3 cases, quoted by 50 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 Donna Heilweil v. Mount Sinai Hospital.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Donna Heilweil v. Mount Sinai Hospital Anchor | green | “an impairment that disqualifies a person from only a narrow range of jobs is not considered a substantially limiting one.” | 23 |
| 2 | McBride v. BIC Consumer Products Manufacturing Co. | green | “a plaintiff must establish a prima facie case; the employer must offer through the introduction of admissible evidence a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for the discharge; and the plaintiff must then produce evidence and carry the burden of persuasion that the proffered rea…” | 9 |
| 3 | Michael Sarno v. Douglas Elliman-Gibbons & Ives, Inc., Insignia Financial Group, Inc. | green | “(1) the employee was engaged in an activity protected by the ada, (2) the employer was aware of that activity, (3) an employment action adverse to the plaintiff occurred, and (4) there existed a causal connection between the protected activity and the adverse employment action.” | 8 |
| 4 | Michael Sarno v. Douglas Elliman-Gibbons & Ives, Inc., Insignia Financial Group, Inc. | green | “to establish a prima facie case of retaliation under the ada, a plaintiff must establish that (1) the employee was engaged in an activity protected by the ada, (2) the employer was aware of that activity, (3) an employment action adverse to the plaintiff occurred, and (4) there …” | 7 |
| 5 | Michael Sarno v. Douglas Elliman-Gibbons & Ives, Inc., Insignia Financial Group, Inc. | green | “a plaintiff must establish that (1) the employee was engaged in an activity protected by the ada, (2) the employer was aware of that activity, (3) an employment action adverse to the plaintiff occurred, and (4) there existed a causal connection between the protected activity and…” | 3 |
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.