§

Kathryn Kershner, Complainant, v. Gale A. Norton, Secretary, Department of the Interior, (National Park Service), Agency.

01995575 (E.E.O.C. Feb. 21, 2002)
Kathryn Kershner, Complainant, v. Gale A. Norton, Secretary, Department of the Interior, (National Park Service), Agency.

7 Cited authorities

  1. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green

    411 U.S. 792 (1973)   Cited 53,093 times   96 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

  2. Sutton v. United Air Lines, Inc.

    527 U.S. 471 (1999)   Cited 2,906 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding that " person whose physical or mental impairment is corrected by medication or other measures does not have an impairment that presently 'substantially limits' a major life activity."

  3. School Bd. of Nassau County v. Arline

    480 U.S. 273 (1987)   Cited 1,033 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that teacher with long dormant disease of tuberculosis that had recently reoccurred was "handicapped" within meaning of Rehabilitation Act

  4. Murphy v. United Parcel Service, Inc.

    527 U.S. 516 (1999)   Cited 504 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "determination of [a person's] disability is made with reference to the mitigating measures he employs."

  5. Hochstadt v. Worcester Foundation for Experimental Biology

    545 F.2d 222 (1st Cir. 1976)   Cited 248 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, in balancing the scope of reasonable opposition conduct, "[t]he requirements of the job and the tolerable limits of conduct in a particular setting must be explored"

  6. Hochstadt v. Worcester Foundation, Etc.

    425 F. Supp. 318 (D. Mass. 1976)   Cited 87 times
    Holding that discharge six months after EEOC settlement and a month after an informal complaint satisfies causation requirement

  7. Section 1630.2 - Definitions

    29 C.F.R. § 1630.2   Cited 8,500 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"