Frank v. University of Toledo

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 did not make a reasonable request for an accommodation until “after the exam results were communicated to him” and concluding that subsequent attempts ■ to accommodate plaintiff were reasonable
• noting that the majority of circuits apply the state statute of limitations for personal injury to Rehabilitation Act/ADA claims, which in Ohio is two years under R.C. § 2305.10
• stating the same with citation to Bleicher v. Univ. of Cincinnati College of Medicine, 78 Ohio App.3d 302, 604 N.E.2d 783 (10th Dist.1992)
• “The continuing violations doctrine does not apply in the Title II disability context. It has applied in the employment discrimination context[.]”
• ADA claim accrued when plaintiff knew or had reason to know of injury from alleged discriminatory act

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).