Lu Woy Hung v. Haff

How courts have described this case

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

• holding a worker who could not perform repetitive motions with her right hand was precluded from “virtually any assembly line job that required repetitive movement”
• explaining that courts assess whether one qualifies as “disabled” under the ADA on a case-by- case basis
• holding plaintiff “faces an insurmountable problem” because she proposed no accommodation that would permit her to perform the production-worker job
• explaining that because there were no allegations of misconduct or the creation of pretextual qualifications, the Court would focus on the employee’s ability to perform the essential functions of the relevant position
• approving of the employer’s affirmative effort to accommodate the plaintiff with a reassignment, but finding insufficient the plaintiffs general request that the employer reassign her to a job that “accommodated her medical restrictions”
• considering \any assembly line job that required repetitive movement\ to be a class of jobs

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).