Horne v. Isaacson

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 IMAP may be ineffective if it requires an inmaté “to seek out and rely upon the cooperation of other inmates”
• concluding that mobility assistance program was ineffective and thus failed to provide a reasonable accommodation
• recognizing that the standards guiding analysis of ADA and Rehabilitation Act claims are “generally the same” with only “subtle distinctions”
• holding that the question of whether a mobility program was 4 Defendants have not contested that Plaintiff has plausibly alleged his disability status. (See generally Defs.’ Mem.
• holding that prison engaged in disability discrimina- tion under Title II when prisoner introduced evidence that he had been “denied meaningful access to prison services, programs, and activities”
• recognizing that if “[a]n accommodation . . . [is] so inadequate that it deters the plaintiff from attempting to access the services otherwise available to him,” then it’s not a reasonable accommodation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).