Skip to main content
· 8/24/2001

Mathews v. Denver Post

Citations

  • 263 F.3d 1164
  • 12 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 250
  • 2001 Colo. J. C.A.R. 4354
  • 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 19057
  • 2001 WL 967797

How courts have described this case

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

  • listing the third element as “suffered adverse employment action because of the disability”
  • recog- nizing that “an employer is not required to accommodate a disabled worker by modifying or eliminating an essential function of the job”
  • “The idea of accommodation is to enable an employee to perform the essential functions of his job; an employer is not required to accommodate a disabled worker by modifying or eliminating an essential function of the job.”
  • “The idea of accommodation is to enable an employee to perform the essential functions of his job; an employer is not required to accommodate a disabled worker by modifying or eliminating an essential function of the job.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Seymour, Gibson, Briscoe

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.