Holly v. Clairson Industries, L.L.C.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an employer cannot simply assert that a function is essential to “avoid the clear congressional mandate that employers mak[e] reasonable accommodations”
• explaining that there is no “additional burden” to show pretext when proving a reasonable-accommodation claim
• explaining that the “burden-shifting analysis of Title VII employment discrimination claims is applicable to ADA claims”
• explaining that an accommodation is reasonable under the ADA if it enables the employee to perform the essential functions of the job
• explaining that the “burden- shifting analysis of Title VII employment discrimination claims is applicable to ADA claims”
• noting that “the ADA may require an employer to restructure a particular job by altering or eliminating some of its marginal functions.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).