Louisville Railway Co. v. Osborne

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that Olzman “adopted a disparate impact theory as to Title II,” but recognizing that the case “also involved evidence of discriminatory intent motivating otherwise race-neutral rules”
• “This Court need not reach the question of whether disparate impact may be alleged under Title II.”
• the plaintiff’s failure to provide evidence of disparate impact “negated any claim of intentional discrimination”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).