Delano-Pyle v. Victoria County, Texas

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “neither a policymaker, nor an official policy must be identified for claims asserted under the ADA” seeking compensatory damages
• holding that “jurisprudence interpreting either” the ADA or the Rehabilitation Act “is applicable to both” (quoting Hainze v. Richards, 207 F.3d 795, 799 (5th Cir. 2000))
• stating that the language in the ADA generally tracks the language in the RA, and jurisprudence interpreting either section is applicable to both
• stating that the language in the ADA generally tracks the language in the RA, and jurisprudence interpreting either section is applicable to both
• stating that the language in the ADA generally tracks the language set forth in the RA and jurisprudence interpreting either section is applicable to both
• explaining that, due to similarities between ADA and Rehabilitation Act, the jurisprudence interpreting either section is applicable to both

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).