Castor v. Cuevas

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming summary judgment in favor of employer on employee’s reassignment claim in part because plaintiff’s affidavit failed to mention “specific circumstances” of desired job opportunities and “said nothing about the essential functions of the jobs in question”
• “to survive an adverse summary judgment on a failure-to-accommodate claim, a plaintiff must point to sufficient evidence showing that ..she is disabled within the ADA’s definition”
• summary judgment proper where employee claimed in affidavit that other employees were transferred to vacant positions where “affidavit did not mention the specific circumstances of the transfers”
• “It is black-letter law that hearsay evidence cannot be considered on summary judgment.”
• “[T]he ‘omission’ of an interactive process ‘is of no moment if the record forecloses a finding’ that the employee could do the essential ‘duties of the job, with or without reasonable accommodation,’—which, for reasons already given, is the case here.” (citation omitted
• explaining what de novo review means

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).