Joyner Lowry v. Dumpson’s Empirical Analysis
712 F.2d 770 · 1983
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 59 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 2017 · most notably Alexander v. Choate (1985), In re Luis C. (1989)
13 federal appellate · 6 district · 2 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 Santosky v. Kramer · Stanley v. Illinois · Griggs v. Duke Power Co. · Dandridge v. Williams · Meyer v. State of Nebraska
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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(8)(A) Except as otherwise provided in subparagraph (B), the term “individual with handicaps” means any individual who (i) has a physical or mental disability which for such individual constitutes or results in a substantial handicap to employment and (ii) can reasonably be expected to benefit in terms of employability from vocational rehabilitation services provided pursuant to subchapters I and III of this chapter. (B) Subject to the second sentence of this subparagraph, the term “individual with handicaps” means, for purposes of sub-chapters IV and V of this chapter, any person who (i) has a physical or mental impairment which substantially limits one or more of such person’s major life activities, (ii) has a record of such an impairment, or (iii) is regarded as having such an impairment. For purposes of sections 793 and 794 of this title as such sections relate to employment, such term does not include any individual who is an alcoholic or drug abuser whose current use of alcohol or drugs prevents such individual from performing the duties of the job in question or whose employment, by reason of such current alcohol or drug abuse, would constitute a direct threat to property or the safety of others.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“does not result in parents' wholesale relinquishment of their right to rear their children,”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[n]o otherwise qualified individual ... shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, ... be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.”
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.