United States v. Walli

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that plaintiffs satisfied commonality requirement even though it was “conceivable that there might be an individual” class member who did not qualify as disabled under ADA where policy generally harmed the class
• excluding from a class individuals whose claims accrued “prior to August 26, 1995, which is one year prior to the filing of this action”
• applying Connecticut’s three-year statute of limitations to claims under Title II of the ADA “in light of the well-established precedent in this Circuit that has repeatedly upheld application of Connecticut’s three-year statute of limitations to federal civil rights cases”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).