Stephanie Gambini v. Total Renal Care, Inc., D/B/A Davita, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• “[T]he prevailing party is not entitled to have disputed factual questions resolved in [its] favor . . . .”
• “[I]f the law 3 fails to protect the manifestations of her disability, there is no real protection in the law 4 because it would protect the disabled in name only.”
• “[I]f the law fails 2 to protect the manifestations of her disability, there is no real protection in the law because 3 it would protect the disabled in name only.”
• “[T]he jury was entitled to infer reasonably that [the plaintiff’s] ‘violent outburst’ . . . was a consequence of her bipolar disorder, which the law protects as part and parcel of her disability.”
• “[W]here an employee 21 demonstrates a causal link between the disability-produced conduct and the termination, a 22 jury must be instructed that it may find that the employee was terminated on the 23 impermissible basis of her disability.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).