Louis P. Forrisi v. Otis R. Bowen’s Empirical Analysis
794 F.2d 931 · 1986
Citation profile
82 federal appellate · 32 district · 22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 227 later decisions — most recently June 2018 · most notably Kocsis v. Multi-Care Management, Inc. (1996), Chandler v. City of Dallas (1993)
82 federal appellate · 32 district · 22 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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 29 U.S.C. § 701 (Employment Opportunities for Individuals With Disabilities Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 706 · 29 U.S.C. § 794A
Relies on Consolidated Rail Corporation v. Darrone · Jasany v. United States Postal Service · 497 F. Supp. 1088 - E. E. Black, Ltd. v. Marshall · Tudyman v. United Airlines
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 227 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he Fourth Circuit held that the employer did not regard the employee as handicapped simply because it found that he could not meet the demands of this particular job. “The statutory reference to a substantial limitation indicates instead that an employer regards an employee as handicapped in his or her ability to work by finding the employee’s impairment to foreclose generally the type of employment involved.””
25 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“assures that truly disabled, but genuinely capable, individuals will not face discrimination in employment because of stereotypes about the insurmountability of their handicaps. It would debase this high purpose if the statutory protections available to those truly handicapped could be claimed by anyone whose disability was minor and whose relative severity of impairment was widely shared. Indeed, the very concept of an impairment implies a characteristic that is not commonplace and that poses for the particular individual a more general disadvantage in his or her search for satisfactory employment.”
23 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(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 impairment, or (iii) is regarded as having such an impairment.”
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.