Benjamin Reynolds v. American National Red Cross

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that \a workers' compensation claim is not something that is covered by the ADA\
• holding that a retaliation claim under the ADA failed because “workers’ compensation claim is not something . . . covered by the ADA.”
• holding that the plaintiff was not substantially limited in his ability to lift under the ADA where his alleged injuries did not restrict him from doing activities of central importance to most people’s daily lives
• holding that the plaintiff was not substantially limited in his ability to lift under the ADA where his alleged injuries did not restrict him from doing activities of central importance to most people’s daily lives
• explaining that “[e]vidence of all [the] elements” of an ADA claim “is necessary to survive summary judgment”
• holding the ADA’s employee threshold is “an element of the claim itself” (citing Arbaugh v. Y & H Corp., 546 U.S. 500, 516 (2006) (Title VII case))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).