Stenrich Group v. Jemmott

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that “just because a doctor opines that a particular impairment is a disease does not necessarily make it so”
• stating that \just because a doctor opines that a particular impairment is a disease does not necessarily make it so\
• rejecting the Piedmont definition of “disease” because “it ... ‘would make unnecessary and meaningless the two categories specifically set forth in the Act’ ”
• rejecting the Piedmont definition of \disease\ because \it . . . `would make unnecessary and meaningless the two categories specifically set forth in the Act'\
• also stating that “the crucial inquiry is whether the Commission correctly applied the law to the established facts”
• also stating that \the crucial inquiry is whether the Commission correctly applied the law to the established facts\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).