Freilich v. Upper Chesapeake Health, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that \[h]ospitals have historically had wide discretion to make decisions regarding their medical staff\
• noting that to state an ADA retaliation claim, the plaintiff must allege that he “engaged in conduct protected by the ADA,” not that he has a disability
• reasoning that “[e]very hospital employee can allege at least a loose association with disabled patients” and that “[t]o allow Dr. Freilich to proceed on such a basis would arm every hospital employee with a potential ADA complaint”
• holding a doctor's \generalized references to association with disabled persons ... [were] not sufficient to state a claim for associational discrimination under the ADA\ because \[e]very hospital employee can allege at least a loose association with disabled patients\
• affirming district court’s dismissal of plaintiffs ADA retaliation claim and noting “Congress declined to give courts a mandate to arbitrate such disputes”
• finding no Tenth Amendment violation where state medical boards were required to share doctors’ licensure information

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).