Skip to main content
· 9/15/2005

Ridgely v. Montgomery County

Citations

  • 883 A.2d 182
  • 164 Md. App. 214
  • 17 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 382
  • 2005 Md. App. LEXIS 198
  • 12 Accom. Disabilities Dec. (CCH) 12

How courts have described this case

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

  • stating that the MCHRA and ADA contain “almost identical” definitions of \disability” and \qualified individual with a disability”
  • stating that the MCHRA and ADA contain “almost identical” definitions of “disability” and (Continued
  • using decisions interpreting the ADA to interpret provisions of Montgomery County’s discrimination law
  • looking to federal decisions interpreting the ADA for guidance in interpreting the MCC

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Panel: Hollander

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.