Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 31 F.3d 209 - Tyndall v. National Education Centers, Inc.

Tyndall v. National Education Centers, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

31 F.3d 209 · 1994

Citation profile

411
cited by 411 later decisions
21
states following
November 2021
most recently cited

95 federal appellate · 64 district · 40 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 411 later decisions — most recently November 2021 · most notably White v. York International Corp. (1995), Smith v. Ameritech (1997)

95 federal appellate · 64 district · 40 state decisions — followed in 21 states

20601994200020102020decided

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. § 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. § 12117 (§ 107 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990)

Relies on Southeastern Community College v. Davis · LeBlanc v. Great American Insurance · Chandler v. City of Dallas · Proud v. Stone

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

  1. “[i]n 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.”
    29 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “an individual with a disability who, with or without reasonable accommodation, can perform the essential functions of the employment position that such individual holds or desires.”
    19 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “First, we must determine whether the individual could perform the essential functions of the job, i.e., functions that bear more than a marginal relationship to the job at issue. Second, if (but only if) we conclude that the individual is not able to perform the essential functions of the job, we must determine whether any reasonable accommodation by the employer would enable [the individual] to perform those functions.”
    8 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.