727 F. Supp. 2d 728 - Rose v. Cahee’s Empirical Analysis
2010
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 705 · 29 U.S.C. § 791 · 29 U.S.C. § 794 · 42 U.S.C. § 12181 (§ 301 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 12182 (§ 302 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 12187 (§ 307 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 12188 (§ 308 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000A
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · City of Los Angeles v. Lyons · Flast v. Cohen · Winter v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The ADA's exemption of religious organizations and religious entities controlled by religious organizations is very broad, encompassing a wide variety of situations. Religious organizations and entities controlled by religious organizations have no obligations under the ADA. Even when a religious organization carries out activities that would otherwise make it a public accommodation, the religious organization is exempt from ADA coverage. Thus, if a church itself operates a day care center, a nursing home, a private school, or a diocesan school system, the operations of the center, home, school, or schools would not be subject to the requirements of the ADA or this part. The religious entity would not lose its exemption merely because the services provided were open to the general public. The test is whether the church or other religious organization operates the public accommodation, not which individuals receive the public accommodation's services. Religious entities that are controlled by religious organizations are also exempt from the ADA's requirements. Many religious organizations in the United States use lay boards and other secular or corporate mechanisms to operate schools and an array of social services. The use of a lay board or other mechanism does not itself remove the ADA's religious exemption. Thus, a parochial school, having religious doctrine in its curriculum and sponsored by a religious order, could be exempt either as a religious organization or as an ent”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a] religious organization need not directly determine the rates for medical services or directly engage in the hiring and firing of employees to control a healthcare institution. Indeed, the regulations specify that many religious organizations use lay boards and other secular mechanisms to operate social service entities, and that such “use of a lay board or other mechanism does not itself remove the ADA’s religious exemption.” 28 C.F.R. Part 36, App. B. Requiring a religious organization to be involved in the daily operations of its social service providers in order to qualify for the § 12187 religious organization exemption undermines the intended broad application of the statute.”
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.