Duvall v. Georgia-Pacific Consumer Products, L.P.

How courts have described this case

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

• “[A]t the summary judgment stage, the plaintiff-employee bears the burden of specifically identifying a vacant position, reassignment to which would serve as a reasonable accommodation.”
• “To be covered under the statute, the disabled employee must be capable of performing the essential core of the job at issue”
• “[A]t the summary judgment stage, the plaintiff-employee bears the burden of specifically identifying a vacant position, reassignment to which would serve as a reasonable accommodation.”
• “[A] position is ‘vacant’ for the purposes of the ADA’s reassignment duty when that position would have been available for similarly-situated nondisabled employees to apply for and obtain.”
• “In the employment context, . . . a position is ‘vacant’ with respect to a disabled employee for the purposes of the ADA if it would be available for a similarly-situated non-disabled employee to apply for and obtain.”
• “[A]t the summary judgment stage, the plaintiff-employee bears the burden of specifically identifying a vacant position, reassignment to which would serve as a reasonable accommodation.” (citing Taylor v. Pepsi–Cola Co., 196 F.3d 1106, 1110 (10th Cir. 1999))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).