McInerney v. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Title III of the ADA, on public accommodations issues, in contrast, does not incorporate the administrative-exhaustion requirement
• holding that ADA retaliation claims “in the employment context require the same procedures” as ADA employment disability discrimination claims, including exhaustion of administrative remedies
• explaining that “Title V retaliation claims in the employment context require the same procedures as those under Title I”
• confirming that Title I of the ADA, which concerns employment protections, requires administrative exhaustion
• stating that a “dismissal for failure to exhaust administrative remedies is more properly characterized as a dismissal for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6
• reversing trial court’s dismissal of an ADA claim for failure to exhaust administrative remedies when facts alleged stated a Title III claim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).