340 U.S. 474 (1951) Cited 9,619 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that court may not "displace the Board's choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo "
456 U.S. 273 (1982) Cited 1,622 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[w]hen an appellate court discerns that a district court has failed to make a finding because of an erroneous view of the law, the usual rule is that there should be a remand for further proceedings to permit the trial court to make the missing findings"
964 F. Supp. 2d 401 (W.D. Pa. 2013) Cited 26 times
Finding a plaintiff's ankle sprain did not qualify her as disabled when she provided no evidence of her level of pain and could not specifically identify the limitations her injury placed on her
42 U.S.C. § 12101 Cited 23,822 times 65 Legal Analyses
Finding a pattern of " unnecessary discrimination and prejudice" that "costs the United States billions of dollars in unnecessary expenses resulting from dependency and nonproductivity"
29 U.S.C. § 791 Cited 2,288 times 6 Legal Analyses
Adopting standards for ADA claims under § 501 of the Rehabilitation Act, including 42 U.S.C. § 12112, which forbids discrimination "against a qualified individual with a disability because of the disability . . ."
29 C.F.R. § 1630.2 Cited 8,457 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"
29 C.F.R. § 1630.1 Cited 212 times 1 Legal Analyses
Noting "broad scope of protection under the ADA" and that "question of whether an individual meets the definition of disability under this part should not demand extensive analysis"
29 C.F.R. § 1614.405 Cited 83 times 3 Legal Analyses
Providing that " decision [of the EEOC in an administrative appeal] is final . . . unless . . . [e]ither party files a timely request for reconsideration"