E. E. Black, Ltd. v. Marshall

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “one particular job for one particular employee cannot be a, ‘major life activity’ ”
• providing that a plaintiffs “own job expectations and training must be taken into account” in considering category of jobs from which plaintiff is excluded
• evaluating the ADA’s identical language to the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
• employer who perceived applicant with congenital back anomaly as poor risk for heavy labor regarded employee as substantially limited in his ability to work
• \We are . . . persuaded that the meaning of the term `employment' in [Or. Rev. Stat. S] 659.400(2)(a) is not at either end of the spectrum.\
• plaintiff suffered from a congenital back anomaly, a partially sa-cralized transitional vertebra, that made him a poor risk for heavy labor

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).