Fuzy v. S&B Engineers & Constructors, Ltd.

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that Armstrong “specifically left open the question of whether or not the language of § 12112(d) would permit a non-disabled person from bringing suit.”
• affirming the district court's dismissal because plaintiff had not raised a genuine issue of material fact that a weight lifting test was not a job related function as to the pipelifting job for which plaintiff sought employment

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).