Dana W. Burns v. City of Columbus, Department of Public Safety, Division of Police

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that plaintiff could not establish a prima facie case of disability discrimination because he had failed to show that the members of a review board that made the ultimate decision to terminate him knew of his disability
• holding that Rehabilitation Act claim requires claimant to show “that he or she is being excluded from participation in, being denied the benefits of, or being subjected to discrimination under the program solely because of his or her handicap”
• stating that the ADA “standards apply in Rehabilitation Act cases alleging employment discrimination,” citing 29 U.S.C. § 794(d), and referring to standards as “burdens of proof or production [] parties bear”
• explaining that if the plaintiff presented no evidence to contradict affidavits that the employer was unaware of a disability and if the disability was not diagnosed until after termination, a prima facie case of discrimination cannot be made
• requiring pretext to be shown by a preponderance of the evidence
• “By statute, the Americans with Disabilities Act standards apply in Rehabilitation Act cases alleging employment discrimination” (citing 29 U.S.C. § 794(d))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).