Saunders v. Horn’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 29 U.S.C. § 794 · 42 U.S.C. § 12131 (§ 201 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 12132 (§ 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 12181 (§ 301 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 12202 (§ 502 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act)) · 42 U.S.C. § 2000D
Relies on Monell v. Department of Social Services of City of New York · Will v. Michigan Department of State Police · United States v. Lopez · Quern v. Jordan · Atascadero State Hospital v. Scanlon
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]t would be anomalous to follow the Fourth Circuit’s suggestion in Torcasio that the Rehabilitation Act and the ADA are inapplicable to programs and services that are obligatory in nature. Such a limitation would appear to immunize disability-based discrimination in the provision of such compulsory services as public education, jury service, and mandatory inoculations. Nothing in the texts of the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act hints at such a result.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Herndon v. Johnson“any department, agency, special purpose district or other instrumentality of a State or States or local government.”
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.