Dropinski v. Douglas County’s Empirical Analysis
298 F.3d 704 · 2002
Citation profile
22 federal appellate · 9 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently June 2024 · most notably Fenney v. Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern Railroad (2003), Heisler v. Metropolitan Council (2003)
22 federal appellate · 9 district · 1 state decisions
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 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 Benson v. Northwest Airlines, Inc. · Fjellestad v. Pizza Hut of America, Inc. · Webner v. Titan Distribution, Inc. · Moritz v. Frontier Airlines, Inc. · Lynn Heaser v. The Toro Company
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 62 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“of the eighteen written job requirements and can lift less than half of the minimum lifting requirement). 25 In the present case, viewing the facts in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, there is a material question of fact as to whether the consequences of allowing Mr. Kammueller to continue his morning shift in the vault and lift less than forty pounds are severe enough to consider this duty”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“that (1) he is disabled within the meaning of the ADA; (2) he is qualified to perform the essential functions of his job with or without reasonable accommodation; and (3) he suffered an adverse employment action under circumstances that give rise to an inference of unlawful discrimination based on disability.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“a covered entity [does] not ... make reasonable accommodation to the known physical or mental limitations of an otherwise qualified applicant or employee with a disability, unless such covered entity can demonstrate that the accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the operation of its business.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Peebles v. Potter
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.