Skip to main content

McBee v. Team Indus., Inc.

Citations

  • 925 N.W.2d 222

How courts have described this case

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

  • recognizing that, with one of the essential tasks in question, evidence was presented that the task was only performed sporadically over the course of a year and that assistance was always available to the employee in performing the task
  • stating that, “[i]f lifting 50 pounds were truly essential, then [the employee’s] past accommodation would not have been possible”
  • stating that a genuine issue of material fact may not be established by “unverified and conclusory allegations” (quotation omitted)
  • rejecting an interpretation of statute, in part, because it “would make the word ‘unless’ meaningless, an outcome normally disfavored in statutory interpretation”
  • “We hold that the Minnesota Human Rights Act does not mandate that employers engage employees in an interactive process to determine whether reasonable accommodations can be made.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Anderson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

19 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.