149 Wash. 2d 521 - Davis v. Microsoft Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
1 district · 18 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 12111 (§ 101 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990)
Relies on Texas Department of Community Affairs v. Burdine · Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. Vinson · West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish · Tyndall v. National Education Centers, Inc. · Beck v. University of Wisconsin Board of Regents
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`when, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, the court can say, as a matter of law, there is no substantial evidence or reasonable inference to sustain a verdict for the nonmoving party.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“(1) the employee had a sensory, mental, or physical abnormality that substantially limited his or her ability to perform the job; (2) the employee was qualified to perform the essential functions of the job in question; (3) the employee gave the employer notice of the abnormality and its accompanying substantial limitations; and (4) upon notice, the employer failed to affirmatively adopt measures that were available to the employer and medically necessary to accommodate the abnormality.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“`would convince an unprejudiced thinking mind of the truth of the fact'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.