Taub v. Frank’s Empirical Analysis
957 F.2d 8 · 1992
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 17 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably Monette v. Electronic Data Systems Corp. (1996), D'Amico v. City of New York (1998)
16 federal appellate · 17 district · 3 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
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 706 · 29 U.S.C. § 794 · 5 U.S.C. § 7701 · 5 U.S.C. § 7702
Relies on Southeastern Community College v. Davis · B.D. International Discount Corp. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A. · Baltimore City Department of Social Services v. Bouknight · Porter v. States · Traynor v. Turnage
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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States ... shall, solely by reason of her or his disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance or under any program or activity conducted by any Executive agency or by the United States Postal Service. (Emphasis supplied) 29 U.S.C. § 794 (a).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“It is not the function of the federal courts to evaluate the appropriateness of agency employment standards but only to safeguard against 'arbitrary, capricious or otherwise unlawful' standards.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Leary v. Dalton“qualified individual with a [disability] who, with or without reasonable accommodation, can perform the essential functions of the position in question....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Leary v. Dalton
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.