366 F. Supp. 2d 57 - Pantazes v. Jackson’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
22 district ·
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 706 · 29 U.S.C. § 791 · 29 U.S.C. § 794 · 42 U.S.C. § 12112 (§ 102 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990)
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green · Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc. · Faragher v. City of Boca Raton
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) he is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) he was subjected to unwelcome harassment; (3) the harassment .was based on his disability; (4) the harassment was sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter a term, condition, or privilege of employment; and (5) some factual basis exists to impute liability for the harassment to the employer.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“reasonable accommodations to the known physical or mental limitations of an otherwise qualified individual with a disability who is an applicant or employee, unless such covered entity can demonstrate that the accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the operation of the business of such covered entity.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Menoken v. Lipnic“(1) that [s]he was an individual with a disability within the meaning of the statute; (2) that the employer had notice of [her] disability; (3) that with reasonable accommodation [s]he could perform the essential functions of the' position; and (4) that the employer refused to make such accommodations.”
1 later decision 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.