Lanman v. Johnson County’s Empirical Analysis
393 F.3d 1151 · 2004
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 12 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently October 2020 · most notably Johnson v. Weld County (2010), Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. C.R. England, Inc. (2011)
10 federal appellate · 12 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
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc. · Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. Vinson · Cannon v. University of Chicago · Karen Sutton Kimberly Hintons v. United Air Lines Inc
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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“These misperceptions often resul[t] from stereotypic assumptions not truly indicative of . individual ability. Congress acknowledged that society’s accumulated myths and fears about disability and disease are as handicapping as are the physical limitations that flow from actual impairment. An individual rejected from a job because of the myths, fears and stereotypes associated with disabilities would be covered under this part of the definition of disability, whether or not the employer’s or other covered entity’s perception were shared by others ... and whether or not the individuals’ actual physical or mental condition would be considered a disability under the first or second part of this definition. As the legislative history notes, sociologists have identified common attitudinal barriers that frequently result in employers excluding individuals with disabilities. These include concerns regarding productivity, safety, insurance, liability, attendance, cost of accommodation and accessibility, workers’ compensation costs, and acceptance by coworkers and customers.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“significantly restricted in the ability to perform either a class of jobs or a broad range of jobs in various classes as compared to the average person having comparable training, skills and abilities. The inability to perform a single, particular job does not constitute a substantial limitation in the major life activity of working.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Congress borrowed this language from Title VII, which similarly provides that it 'shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employer to fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual with respect to his compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment. '”
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.