Colmenares v. Braemar Country Club, Inc.

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 plaintiff need only show that a condition limits, as opposed to substantially limits (the federal requirement), his ability to participate in a major life activity
• holding that FEHA requires that a physical condition only limit, not substantially limit, participation in major life activities
• holding that the 2001 amendments to the definition of disability merely clarified existing law
• noting that California courts give “substantial weight” to regulations construing FEHA issued by the agency responsible for administering the statute
• noting that California 24 courts give “substantial weight” to regulations construing FEHA issued by the agency responsible 25 for administering the statute
• explaining that 5 California courts give “substantial weight” to regulations construing FEHA’s statutory definitions (quoting Kelly v. Methodist Hosp. of S. Cal., 22 Cal. 4th 1108, 1118 (2000))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).