Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 294 F.3d 35 - Regional Economic Community Action Program, Inc. v. City of Middletown

Regional Economic Community Action Program, Inc. v. City of Middletown’s Empirical Analysis

294 F.3d 35 · 2002

Citation profile

215
cited by 215 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
February 2025
most recently cited

49 federal appellate · 30 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 215 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2025 · most notably Shotz v. City of Plantation (2003), Sista v. CDC Ixis North America, Inc. (2006)

49 federal appellate · 30 district · 2 state decisions

1240200220102020decided

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 29 U.S.C. § 701 · 29 U.S.C. § 705 · 29 U.S.C. § 791 · 29 U.S.C. § 794 · 42 U.S.C. § 12101 (§ 2 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 12102 (§ 3 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 12132 (§ 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 12203 (§ 503 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990)

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc. · St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks

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

  1. “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subject to discrimination by any such entity.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(1) the occurrence of certain outwardly neutral practices, and (2) a significantly adverse or disproportionate impact on persons of a particular type produced by the defendant's facially neutral acts or practices.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The ADA and the [RA] . . . prohibit all discrimination based on disability by public entities.”
    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.