Gorbrandt v. Gorbrandt

How courts have described this case

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

• “Where a plaintiff relies on circumstantial evidence of retaliation, the familiar burden-shifting evidentiary framework applies.”
• “Although the Ninth Circuit has not definitively 24 spoken as to whether Rule 9(b
• defendant employer was entitled to summary judgment on ADA discrimination claim because evidence showed that the plaintiff’s driving restriction prevented him from performing essential functions of his job and he failed to request a reasonable accommodation
• “If a claimant cannot show that he can perform the essential functions of a given position with or without an accommodation, he is not a ‘qualified individual with a disability’ within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. § 12111(8).” (citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).