Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 162 F.3d 924 - Corder v. Lucent Technologies Inc.

Corder v. Lucent Technologies Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

162 F.3d 924 · 1998

Citation profile

57
cited by 57 later decisions
3
states following
April 2021
most recently cited

19 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently April 2021 · most notably Silk v. City of Chicago (1999), Zenaida Garc a-Ayala v. Lederle Parenterals Inc et al. (2000)

19 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 state decisions

3301998200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1920 · 42 U.S.C. § 12101 (§ 2 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 12112 (§ 102 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990)

Relies on Tyndall v. National Education Centers, Inc. · Gile v. United Airlines, Inc. · Weeks v. Samsung Heavy Industries Co. · Popeil Bros. v. Schick Electric, Inc. · Cengr v. Fusibond Piping Systems, Inc.

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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “in most instances the ADA does not protect persons who have erratic, unexplained absences, even when those absences are a result of a disability. The fact is that in most cases, attendance at the job site is a basic requirement of most jobs. As the Tyndall court put it: [A]n evaluation of the quality of Tyndall’s performance does not end our inquiry. In addition to possessing the skills necessary to perform the job in question, an employee must be willing and able to demonstrate these skills by coming to work on a regular basis. Except in the unusual case where an employee can effectively perform all work-related duties at home, an employee “who does not come to work cannot perform any of his job functions, essential or otherwise.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “an 'unpredictable' amount of time off from work should her symptoms so demand.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.