Hwang v. Kansas State University

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that this court had “no occasion to rule on [a motion]” where that motion was withdrawn at oral argument
• stating that a plaintiff alleging she was similarly situated was “just a legal conclusion—and a legal conclusion is never enough”
• “[H]olding onto a non- performing employee for six months just isn’t something the Rehabilitation Act ordinarily compels.”
• finding employee who could not work for six months incapable of □ discharging essential employment duties
• addressing the employer’s defensive undue-hardship burden under essentially coterminous substantive standards of the Rehabilitation Act
• affirming dismissal where the plaintiff “pleaded no facts about the non-disabled [putative comparators], let alone facts suggesting they are like her in any relevant way”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).