David W. Ellis, Jr. v. Gordon R. England

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “mere conclusions and unsupported factual allegations are legally insufficient to defeat a summary judgment motion.”
• holding that “mere conclusions and unsupported factual allegations are legally insufficient to defeat a summary judgment motion”
• holding that “mere conclusions and unsupported factual allegations are legally insufficient to defeat a summary judgment motion”
• stating that mere conclusions and unsupported factual allegations are legally insufficient to survive summary judgment
• finding that \mere conclusions and unsupported factual allegations are legally insufficient to defeat a summary judgment motion\
• explaining that “[i]t is not enough [under the Rehabilitation Act] for a plaintiff to demonstrate that an adverse employment action was based partly on his disability”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).