Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 203 NJ 383 - Victor v. State

Victor v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2010

Citation profile

69
cited by 69 later decisions
1
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

14 district · 27 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 29 U.S.C. § 701 (Employment Opportunities for Individuals With Disabilities Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 793 · 42 U.S.C. § 12101 (§ 2 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 12111 (§ 101 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 12112 (§ 102 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 12201 (§ 501 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 701 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000E (§ 703 of the Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964)

Relies on McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Griggs v. Duke Power Co. · Missouri v. Continential Insurance Cos. · Robertson v. Methow Valley Citizens Council · Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Hardison

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

  1. “is qualified to perform the essential functions of the job, or was performing those essential functions, either with or without reasonable accommodations”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Rich v. State · 459 N.J. Super. 400 - Richter v. Oakland Bd. of Educ.
  2. “qualifies as an individual with a disability, or [ ] is perceived as having a disability, as that has been defined by statute”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. 459 N.J. Super. 400 - Richter v. Oakland Bd. of Educ. · Caraballo v. City of Jersey City Police Dep't
  3. “[d]isability discrimination claims are different from other kinds of discrimination claims, for several reasons.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. 459 N.J. Super. 400 - Richter v. Oakland Bd. of Educ. · 636 F. App'x 831 - Margaret Tourtellotte v. Eli Lilly & Co

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.