Tice v. Centre Area Transportation Authority

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that all federal courts of appeals to consider the issue have held that a violation of § 12112(d) is alone insufficient to confer standing
• holding that a request that an employee seek a health evaluation “only establishes that the employer harbors doubts (not certainties) with respect to the employee[ ]----[and d]oubts alone do not demonstrate that the employee was held in any particular regard”
• observing that the ADA and social security regulations employ different standards to assess an individual’s disability
• noting that plaintiff “has not even identified a single person who improperly viewed his medical files”
• finding no issue of fact because plaintiff failed to identify similarly situated employees who were treated differently
• suggesting that an “emotional” injury could constitute “actual damage”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).