§Why CasetextPricing

Rodriguez v. JetBlue Airways Corporation

MEMORANDUM in Support re MOTION for Summary Judgment

76 Cited authorities

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.

    477 U.S. 242 (1986)   Cited 237,290 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"

  2. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green

    411 U.S. 792 (1973)   Cited 52,440 times   95 Legal Analyses
    Holding in employment discrimination case that statistical evidence of employer's general policy and practice may be relevant circumstantial evidence of discriminatory intent behind individual employment decision

  3. Hazen Paper Co. v. Biggins

    507 U.S. 604 (1993)   Cited 1,912 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that age and years of service, pension status, or seniority are "analytically distinct" and an employer may rely on one while ignoring the other

  4. Ragsdale v. Wolverine World Wide, Inc.

    535 U.S. 81 (2002)   Cited 904 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding employee must “ha[ve] been prejudiced by the violation” to obtain relief

  5. Albertsons, Inc. v. Kirkingburg

    527 U.S. 555 (1999)   Cited 680 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that although vision-impaired individuals may not have "an onerous burden" in demonstrating disability and "ordinarily will meet the [ADA]'s definition of disability," they must still offer evidence of "limitation in terms of their own experience"

  6. Murphy v. United Parcel Service, Inc.

    527 U.S. 516 (1999)   Cited 502 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "determination of [a person's] disability is made with reference to the mitigating measures he employs."

  7. Mesnick v. General Elec. Co.

    950 F.2d 816 (1st Cir. 1991)   Cited 1,984 times
    Holding that plaintiff had not provided "direct or circumstantial" evidence to overcome summary judgment

  8. Calero-Cerezo v. U.S. Dept. of Justice

    355 F.3d 6 (1st Cir. 2004)   Cited 1,206 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that one-month period was sufficient temporal proximity for prima facie case

  9. Medina-Munoz v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.

    896 F.2d 5 (1st Cir. 1990)   Cited 1,976 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that one opposing summary judgment cannot rely simply on "conclusory allegations" or "unsupported speculation"

  10. Greenberg v. Bellsouth Telecomm

    498 F.3d 1258 (11th Cir. 2007)   Cited 652 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Affirming the grant of summary judgment against an ADA plaintiff who suffered from diabetes, hypertension, hypothyroidism, and obesity because the plaintiff could not establish that he was disabled pursuant to ADA standards

  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 330,300 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  12. Section 12112 - Discrimination

    42 U.S.C. § 12112   Cited 13,611 times   159 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing failure to accommodate as form of discrimination

  13. Section 2612 - Leave requirement

    29 U.S.C. § 2612   Cited 4,966 times   39 Legal Analyses
    Granting qualifying employees twelve weeks of FMLA leave in a 12-month period

  14. Section 760.10 - Unlawful employment practices

    Fla. Stat. § 760.10   Cited 530 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Stating that it is unlawful to retaliate against "any person"

  15. Section 1630.2 - Definitions

    29 C.F.R. § 1630.2   Cited 8,362 times   141 Legal Analyses
    Holding that major life activity is substantially limited if plaintiff is "significantly restricted in the ability to perform either a class of jobs or a broad range of jobs in various classes as compared to the average person having comparable training, skills and abilities"

  16. Section 825.303 - Employee notice requirements for unforeseeable FMLA leave

    29 C.F.R. § 825.303   Cited 812 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Explaining notice should include "the anticipated duration of the absence, if known "

  17. Section 1630.15 - Defenses

    29 C.F.R. § 1630.15   Cited 247 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Explaining that it is a defense to liability under the ADA "that another [f]ederal law or regulation prohibits an action (including the provision of a particular reasonable accommodation) that would otherwise be required by this part"

  18. Section 40.23 - What actions do employers take after receiving verified test results?

    49 C.F.R. § 40.23   Cited 17 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Providing "[w]hat actions do employers take after receiving verified test results"

  19. Section 40.261 - What is a refusal to take an alcohol test?

    49 C.F.R. § 40.261   Cited 3 times

    (a) As an employee, you are considered to have refused to take an alcohol test if you: (1) Fail to appear for any test (except a pre-employment test) within a reasonable time, as determined by the employer, consistent with applicable DOT agency regulations, after being directed to do so by the employer. This includes the failure of an employee (including an owner-operator) to appear for a test when called by a C/TPA (see §40.241(a)); (2) Fail to remain at the testing site until the testing process

  20. Section 120.217 - Tests required

    14 C.F.R. § 120.217   Cited 2 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Requiring reasonable suspicion alcohol testing

  21. Section 40.265 - What happens when an employee is unable to provide a sufficient amount of breath for an alcohol test?

    49 C.F.R. § 40.265   Cited 1 times

    (a) If an employee does not provide a sufficient amount of breath to permit a valid breath test, you must take the steps listed in this section. (b) As the BAT or STT, you must instruct the employee to attempt again to provide a sufficient amount of breath and about the proper way to do so. (1) If the employee refuses to make the attempt, you must discontinue the test, note the fact on the "Remarks" line of the ATF, and immediately notify the DER. This is a refusal to test. (2) If the employee again

  22. Section 40.251 - What are the first steps in an alcohol confirmation test?

    49 C.F.R. § 40.251   Cited 1 times

    As the BAT for an alcohol confirmation test, you must follow these steps to begin the confirmation test process: (a) You must carry out a requirement for a waiting period before the confirmation test, by taking the following steps: (1) You must ensure that the waiting period lasts at least 15 minutes, starting with the completion of the screening test. After the waiting period has elapsed, you should begin the confirmation test as soon as possible, but not more than 30 minutes after the completion

  23. Section 40.267 - What problems always cause an alcohol test to be cancelled?

    49 C.F.R. § 40.267   Cited 1 times

    As an employer, a BAT, or an STT, you must cancel an alcohol test if any of the following problems occur. These are "fatal flaws." You must inform the DER that the test was cancelled and must be treated as if the test never occurred. These problems are: (a) In the case of a screening test conducted on a saliva ASD or a breath tube ASD: (1) The STT or BAT reads the result either sooner than or later than the time allotted by the manufacturer and this Part (see §40.245(a)(8) for the saliva ASD and

  24. Section 40.271 - How are alcohol testing problems corrected?

    49 C.F.R. § 40.271

    (a) As a BAT or STT, you have the responsibility of trying to complete successfully an alcohol test for each employee. (1) If, during or shortly after the testing process, you become aware of any event that will cause the test to be cancelled (see §40.267), you must try to correct the problem promptly, if practicable. You may repeat the testing process as part of this effort. (2) If repeating the testing process is necessary, you must begin a new test as soon as possible. You must use a new ATF,