§Why CasetextPricing

Heit v. Aerotek Inc et al

MOTION for Summary Judgment

14 Cited authorities

  1. Riehl v. Foodmaker, Inc.

    152 Wn. 2d 138 (Wash. 2004)   Cited 193 times
    Noting a variety of circumstantial evidence supporting a discrimination claim

  2. Kaplan v. City of North Las Vegas

    323 F.3d 1226 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 136 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the plaintiff was not a "qualified individual" where the medical evidence showed that the plaintiff could not perform the essential functions of the employment position

  3. Felkins v. City of Lakewood

    774 F.3d 647 (10th Cir. 2014)   Cited 83 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the plaintiff needed medical evidence to establish "impairment" based on a diagnosis of "avascular necrosis"; the plaintiff's own declarations stating that she had avascular necrosis were not sufficient proof

  4. Transworld Airlines, Inc. v. American Coupon Exchange, Inc.

    913 F.2d 676 (9th Cir. 1990)   Cited 96 times
    Holding that frequent flyer coupon rights are rights of contract rather than property rights and concluding that "an explicit contractual provision forbidding assignment of a right created by contract is ordinarily enforceable according to its terms"

  5. Clipse v. Commercial Driver Servs., Inc.

    189 Wn. App. 776 (Wash. Ct. App. 2015)   Cited 28 times   1 Legal Analyses

    No. 45407–6–II. 08-25-2015 Ronald CLIPSE, Appellant–Cross Respondent, v. COMMERCIAL DRIVER SERVICES, INC., a Washington Corporation, and Lee Brunk and Jane Doe Brunk, and the marital community comprised thereof, Respondent–Cross Appellant. Dan'l Wayne Bridges, McGaughey Bridges Dunlap PLLC, Seattle, WA, for Appellant–Cross Respondent. Lori Marie Bemis, McGavick Graves, Tacoma, WA, Steven M. Bobman, Steven Bobman, University Place, WA, for Respondent–Cross Appellant. WORSWICK, P.J. Dan'l Wayne Bridges

  6. Scott v. Napolitano

    717 F. Supp. 2d 1071 (S.D. Cal. 2010)   Cited 19 times
    Finding that supervisor's disparaging comments about employee's mental health did not violate ADA where supervisor "had a personal vendetta against" employee and "did not actually believe that [employee] was disabled as a result of a mental condition"

  7. Kelley v. Amazon.com, Inc.

    NO: 12-CV-5132-TOR (E.D. Wash. Nov. 21, 2013)   Cited 8 times
    Discussing U.S. Equal Emp't Opp'y Comm'n, The Americans with Disabilities Act: Applying Performance and Conduct Standards to Employees with Disabilities, available at http://eeoc.gov/facts/performance-conduct.html

  8. Jennings v. AAON, Inc.

    Case No. 14-CV-0347-CVE-PJC (N.D. Okla. Jun. 1, 2015)   Cited 5 times
    Rejecting the "self-diagnosis of an impairment," and noting that plaintiff's "lay opinion [regarding] a mold allergy is inadmissible and . . . is not an acceptable substitute for medical evidence or the testimony of a medical expert"

  9. Poulsen v. Humana Ins. Co.

    Case No. 14-2477-JAR-KGS (D. Kan. Mar. 10, 2016)   Cited 1 times

    Case No. 14-2477-JAR-KGS 03-10-2016 KAREN POULSEN, Plaintiff, v. HUMANA INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. JULIE A. ROBINSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff Karen Poulsen brings this action pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, ("ADA") as amended by the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 ("ADAAA"), against her former employer, Defendant Humana Insurance Company ("Humana"). Plaintiff alleges that Humana failed to provide reasonable accommodations in connection with her alleged

  10. Carr v. Boeing Co.

    CASE NO. C13-1753-JCC (W.D. Wash. Jul. 7, 2014)   Cited 1 times

    CASE NO. C13-1753-JCC 07-07-2014 CATHERINE CARR, Plaintiff, v. THE BOEING COMPANY, Defendant. John C. Coughenour THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR ORDER This matter comes before the Court on Defendant's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 23.) Having thoroughly considered the parties' briefing and the relevant record, the Court finds oral argument unnecessary and hereby GRANTS the motion for the reasons explained herein. I. BACKGROUND In September 2007, Plaintiff Catherine Carr was hired by Defendant

  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 328,220 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  12. Rule 26 - Duty to Disclose; General Provisions Governing Discovery

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 26   Cited 94,578 times   650 Legal Analyses
    Adopting Fed.R.Civ.P. 37

  13. Section 12102 - Definition of disability

    42 U.S.C. § 12102   Cited 10,769 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing ADA claim where plaintiff is "regarded as" disabled