WWW.DISSERTATION.XLIBX.INFO
FREE ELECTRONIC LIBRARY - Dissertations, online materials
 
<< HOME
CONTACTS



Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 5 | 6 ||

«Brief No. 22 EMPLOYMENT May 2014 Legal Briefings Prepared by: Barry C. Taylor, Vice President of Systemic Litigation and Civil Rights and Rachel M. ...»

-- [ Page 7 ] --

In Smith v. Clark County School District, the Ninth Circuit also found that the employee sufficiently explained the apparent inconsistency between the employee’s statements on applications for disability benefits and her ADA claim.120 In Smith, an employee with a back injury worked as a literary specialist for the district. In April 2008, she requested FMLA leave. In May 2008, she applied for and began receiving private disability benefits through the American Fidelity Assurance Company, and in late August 2008, she applied for disability retirement benefits under the Nevada Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS). For PERS, Smith’s doctor certified that Smith was “unable to work due to injury or mental or physical illness,” and her application for “total and permanent disability” was approved in October 2008.121 According to the court, there are circumstances where an employee honestly avers that he or she cannot work when they apply for benefits, and then recovers. It declared: “There is no inconsistency Brief No. 22 May 2014 Qualified Under the ADA: The New Legal Battleground After the ADA Amendments Act between being totally disabled at a particular point in time and in not being totally disabled at a later point in time.”122 Here, the court explained that Smith could have been completely incapacitated in April—or even August—but still be able to work during the 2008-2009 school year, given that the nature of individual’s disabilities may change over time. Notably, the court emphasized that even if the Smith had not recovered by the start of the 2008-2009 school year, it may have been reasonable for the school district to accommodate her disability through an extended leave of

Battleground After the ADA Amendments Actabsence.

Qualified Under the ADA: The New Legal Likewise, the temporary versus permanent nature of the disability benefits often provide a way to reconcile statements. In Smith, in addition to PERS, the employee applied for leave under the FMLA. Smith explained that her “FMLA applications required temporary disability leave and were not an admission of permanent inability to work,” an argument that the court characterized as “brief” but found sufficient to permit a reasonable juror to conclude that Smith could perform the essential functions of the job with or without accommodation.123 Explaining Inconsistency: Considering Reasonable Accommodations Courts have also generally followed the Supreme Court’s directive in Cleveland, and recognized that the SSA determines SSDI benefits without considering whether an individual needed a reasonable accommodation. In Smith, in addition to reconciling the employee’s statement due to the passage of time, the Ninth Circuit also emphasized the possibility of the employee working with an accommodation.124 Here, the plaintiff reconciled her apparently inconsistent statements by explaining that she could have worked in the position of literary-specialist with the accommodation that she be able to sit down regularly or lie down when needed. Notably, this explanation is consistent with the underlying facts the employee stated on her application, which was that she could perform the “sitting” duties of the literary-specialist position.

However, some courts require the plaintiff to do more than just say that an accommodation would exist, but to actually explain the viability of accommodation. In Anderson v. Georgia-Pacific Wood Products, LLC, a maintenance technician had Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (“COPD”) due to his military service.125 As a result, he was unable to work around dust. While out on short-term disability leave, he applied for SSDI and Veteran’s Disability Benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs (“DVA”). The DVA concluded that he was 100% disabled. On his SSDI application, Anderson attested that he became short of breath with physical activity and exposure to high temperatures and that he used oxygen when sleeping, when going outside and otherwise as needed. In attempting to reconcile his inconsistent statements, Anderson stated that he could have worked had he been able to use a respirator. The court rejected this argument, however, explaining that Anderson provided no evidence that he was capable of wearing a respirator, and pointed to Anderson’s medical tests which demonstrated that he could not wear a respirator while Brief No. 22 May 2014 Qualified Under the ADA: The New Legal Battleground After the ADA Amendments Act at work. Anderson also attempted to argue that he could have worked in a different position, had he been reassigned to one. Rejecting this argument as well, the court explained that even if there were a vacant position, there was no evidence that Anderson could have performed the essential functions in light of his permanent restrictions. As a result, the court granted the employer’s motion for summary judgment, finding Anderson not qualified under the ADA. Likewise, in the Butler v.

Village of Round Lake Police Department case discussed above, the police officer also

–  –  –

Conclusion As discussed in this Legal Brief, the ADA litigation landscape has shifted from whether an individual has a “disability” under the ADA to whether an individual is “qualified.” While the majority of cases regarding qualified turn on which functions are essential, issues related to “qualified” intersect the ADA’s other legal concepts as well, including “regarded as,” “reasonable accommodation,” and “direct threat.” Applicants and employees with disabilities, as well as employers, should review the EEOC’s regulatory language and recent case law to better understand when an individual is qualified under the ADA.





Notes:

1. This legal brief was written by Barry C. Taylor, Vice President of Systemic Litigation and Civil Rights and Rachel M. Weisberg, Staff Attorney, with Equip for Equality, the Illinois Protection and Advocacy Agency (P&A). The authors would like to thank Christopher Tourek, Equip for Equality Volunteer Attorney, for his assistance with this Legal Brief. Equip for Equality is providing this information under a subcontract with Great Lakes ADA Center.

2. 42 U.S.C. § 12102(4)(A).

3. For a detailed analysis on the impact of the ADA Amendments Act on judicial interpretations of the definition of disability, see Legal Briefing: The Litigation Landscape Five Years After the Passage of the ADA Amendments Act, B. Taylor and R. Weisberg. September 2013. Available at www.ada-audio.org/Archives/ Brief No. 22 May 2014 Qualified Under the ADA: The New Legal Battleground After the ADA Amendments Act ADALegal/Materials/FY2013/2013-09-18% 5ELegal_Brief_ADAAA_Five_Years_Later_(9%2012%2013).pdf

4. See Stephen F. Befort, An Empirical Analysis of Case Outcomes Under the ADA Amendments Act, 70 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 27, FN 130, available at http:// papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? abstract_id=231462 (citing Anderson v. Georgia

-Pacific Wood Products, LLC, 942 F.Supp.2d 1195, (M.D. Ala. 2013) (granting Battleground After the ADA Amendments Act summary judgment to employer on qualified issue); Bonnette v. Shinseki, 907 F.Supp.2d 54 (D.D.C. 2012) (granting summary judgment to employer on qualified Qualified Under the ADA: The New Legal issue); E.E.O.C. v. Creative Networks, LLC, 912 F.Supp.2d 828 (D. Ariz. 2012) (denying employer’s summary judgment motion on qualified issue)).

5. See id. at FN 8 (citing Stephen F. Befort, Let’s Try This Again: The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 Attempts to Reinvigorate the “Regarded As” Prong of the Statutory Definition of Disability, 2010 UTAH L. REV. 993stating that “the new focus likely will center more on whether an individual is qualified to perform the job in question”); Carol J. Miller, EEOC Reinforces Broad Interpretation of ADAAA Disability Qualification: But What Does “Substantially Limits” Mean?, 76 MO. L.

REV. 43, 74 (2011) (stating that “the issue of whether the individual’s requested accommodation is reasonable will emerge more frequently”)).

6. See id., generally.

7. 42 U.S.C. § 12111(8).

8. 29 C.F.R. 1630.2(m).

9. 29 C.F.R. Pt. 1630, App. 1630.2(m).

10. 29 C.F.R. 1630.2(m).

11. EEOC Technical Assistance Manual: Title I of the ADA. Available at http:// askjan.org/links/adatam1.html.

12. Id.

13. 29 C.F.R. 1630.2(n)(1).

14. 29 C.F.R. 1630.2(n)(2).

15. 29 C.F.R. 1630.2(n)(3).

16. Id.

17. 29 C.F.R. Pt. 1630, App. 1630.2(m).

18. 29 C.F.R. 1630.2(m).

19. Wirey v. Richland Community College, 913 F.Supp.2d 633 (C.D. Ill. 2012) (finding that plaintiff had the skills and experience for the position, but ultimately concluding that she was not qualified and granted the employer’s motion for summary judgment).

Brief No. 22 May 2014 Qualified Under the ADA: The New Legal Battleground After the ADA Amendments Act

20. Torres v. House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of P.R., 858 F.Supp.2d 172 (D.P.R. 2012).

21. Keith v. County of Oakland, 703 F.3d 918 (6th Cir. 2013).

22. Id. at 926.

23. See Nelson v. City of New York, 2013 WL 4437224 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 19, 2013) Battleground After the ADA Amendments Act (discussing the two-step process for determining whether an individual is qualified).

Qualified Under the ADA: The New Legal

24. Demyanovich v. Cadon Plating & Coatings, --- F.3d ---, 2014 WL 1259603 (6th Cir.

March 28, 2014).

25. EEOC v. Heartland Automotive Services, 2013 WL 6065928 (W.D. Tenn. Nov. 18, 2013).

26. Id. at *3.

27. Boitnott v. Corning Inc., 2010 WL 2465490, *9 (W.D. Va. June 15, 2010); Rehrs v.

Iams Co., 486 F.3d 353, 356 (8th Cir. 2007).

28. Abara v. Altec Indus., Inc., 838 F. Supp. 2d 995, 1001 (E.D. Cal. 2011) citing Bates v. United Parcel Serv. Inc., 511 F.3d 974, 991 (9th Cir. 2007).

29. Bambrick v. Sam’s West, Inc., 2013 WL 427399 (N.D. Iowa Feb. 4, 2013).

30. Keith v. County of Oakland, 703 F.3d 918 (6th Cir. 2013).

31. Mustafa v. Clark Cnty. Sch. Dist., 157 F.3d 1169 (9th Cir. 1998) (holding that employer’s judgment “does not qualify as an undisputed statement of fact in the context of a motion for summary judgment”).

32. Henschel v. Clare County Road Commission, 737 F.3d 1017 (6th Cir. 2013).

33. Id. at 1022.

34. Lee v. Harrah’s New Orleans, 2013 WL 3899895 (E.D. La. July 29, 2013).

35. EEOC v. Heartland Automotive Services, 2013 WL 6065928 (W.D. Tenn. Nov. 18, 2013).

36. Henschel v. Clare County Road Commission, 737 F.3d 1017 (6th Cir. 2013).

37. Bambrick v. Sam’s West, Inc., 2013 WL 427399 (N.D. Iowa Feb. 4, 2013).

38. Rorrer v. City of Stow, 743 F.3d 1025, 1031 (6th Cir. 2014).

39. Zimple v. Hancock Fabrics, Inc. 2013 WL 4069553 (N.D. Iowa Aug. 12, 2013).

40. Bisker v. GGS Information Services, Inc., 2010 WL 2265979 (M.D. Pa. June 2, 2010).

41. EEOC Technical Assistance Manual: Title I of the ADA. Available at http:// askjan.org/links/adatam1.html.

42. Brickers v. Cleveland Bd. Of Educ., 145 F.3d 846 (6th Dist. 1998).

Brief No. 22 May 2014 Qualified Under the ADA: The New Legal Battleground After the ADA Amendments Act

43. Moore v. Jackson County Board of Education, --- F.Supp.2d ---, 2013 WL 5797844 (Oct. 28, 2013 N.D. Ala.).

44. Proctor v. Northern Lakes Community Mental Health Authority, 2012 WL 3637604 (W.D. Mich. 2012).

45. Brickers v. Cleveland Bd. Of Educ., 145 F.3d 846 (6th Dist. 1998).

Battleground After the ADA Amendments Act

46. See O’Campo v. Chico Mall, LP, 758 F.Supp.2d 976 (E.D.Cal. 2010) (finding a state law statute preempted to the extent it conflicts with the ADA).

Qualified Under the ADA: The New Legal

47. Samson v. Fed. Exp. Corp., 2014 WL 1226847, at *1 (11th Cir. Mar. 26, 2014).

48. Moore v. Jackson County Board of Education, --- F.Supp.2d ---, 2013 WL 5797844 (N.D. Ala. Oct. 28, 2013).

49. Gober v. Frankel Family Trust, 537 Fed.Appx. 518 (5th Cir. 2013).

50. Knutson v. Schwan’s Home Service, Inc., 711 F.3d 911 (8th Cir. 2013).

51. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Denny’s, Inc., 2010 WL 2817109 (D. Md. July 16, 2010).

52. Id. at *2.

53. Burnett v. Pizza Hut of Am., Inc., 92 F.Supp.2d 1142, 1146 (D. Kan. 2000).

54. EEOC Technical Assistance Manual: Title I of the ADA. Available at http:// askjan.org/links/adatam1.html.

55. Keith v. County of Oakland, 703 F.3d 918 (6th Cir. 2013).

56. Id. at 920.

57. Zombeck v. Friendship Ridge, 2011 WL 666200 (W.D. Pa. 2011).

58. Id. at *8 (quoting 136 Cong. Rec. 11,451 (1990)).

59. Walter v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 2011 WL 4537931, at *9 (N.D. Ind. Sept. 28, 2011).

60. Walter v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 2011 WL 4537931, at *9 (N.D. Ind. Sept. 28, 2011).

61. EEOC Technical Assistance Manual: Title I of the ADA. Available at http:// askjan.org/links/adatam1.html (“The ADA does not limit an employer's ability to establish or change the content, nature, or functions of a job.”) (Emphasis added).

62. Phelps v. Optima Health, Inc., 251 F.3d 21 (1st Cir. 2001) (explaining judicial desire not to “punish” employers from doing more than the ADA requires).

63. Hancock v. Washington Hosp. Ctr., --- F.Supp.2d --, 2014 WL 60288 (D.D.C. Jan.

7, 2014).

64. Minnihan v. Mediacom Communications Corp., --- F.Supp.2d---, 2013 WL 6680982 (S.D. Iowa Dec. 19, 2013).

65. Phelps v. Optima Health, Inc., 251 F.3d 21 (1st Cir. 2001) (explaining judicial desire Brief No. 22 May 2014 Qualified Under the ADA: The New Legal Battleground After the ADA Amendments Act not to “punish” employers from doing more than the ADA requires).

66. Zombeck v. Friendship Ridge, 2011 WL 666200 (W.D. Pa. 2011).

67. Bambrick v. Sam’s West, Inc., 2013 WL 427399 (N.D. Iowa Feb. 4, 2013).

68. Lane v. Prince George’s County Public Schools, 2013 WL 4541624 (D. Md. Aug.

26, 2013).

Battleground After the ADA Amendments Act69. Id. at *4.

Qualified Under the ADA: The New Legal

70. Tjernagel v. Gates Corp., 533 F.3d 666 (8th Cir. 2008).

71. Id. at 670.

72. See e.g., Murphy v. Samson Resources Co., 525 Fed.Appx. 703 (10th Cir. 2013) (holding that regular and punctual attendance is an essential function for an accounting assistant based on the job description and employer judgment, and because indefinite leave is not a reasonable accommodation, the employee was not qualified).

73. E.E.O.C. v. Ford Motor Company, --- F.3d ---, 2014 WL 1584674 (6th Cir. April 22, 2014).

74. Id. at *6.

75. Walker v. NANA WorleyParsons, LLC, 2013 WL 357571 (D. Alaska, Jan. 28, 2013).

76. E.E.O.C. v. AT&T Corp., 2013 WL 6154563 (S.D. Ind. Nov. 20, 2013).

77. Id. at *4.

78. Kallail v. Alliant Energy Corporate Services, Inc., 2011 WL 1833347 (N.D. Iowa, May 13, 2011).

79. Boitnott v. Corning Inc., 2010 WL 2465490 (W.D. Va. June 15, 2010).

80. E.E.O.C. v. Union Carbide Chemicals & Plastics Co., Inc., 1995 WL 495910 (E.D.

La. Aug. 18, 1995).

81. Russo v. Jefferson Parish Water Department, 1997 WL 695602 (E.D. La. Nov. 6, 1997).

82. Tjernagel v. Gates Corp., 533 F.3d 666 (8th Cir. 2008).

83. Davis v. Florida Power & Light Co., 205 F.3d 1301 (11th Cir. 2000).

84. Feldman v. Olin Corp., 692 F.3d 748 (7th Cir. 2012).

85. Majors v. General Electric Co., 714 F.3d 527 (7th Cir. 2013).

86. Zombeck v. Friendship Ridge, 2011 WL 666200 (W.D. Pa. 2011).

87. Id. at *7.

88. Cefalu v. Holder, 2013 WL 5315079 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 23, 2013).

Brief No. 22 May 2014 Qualified Under the ADA: The New Legal Battleground After the ADA Amendments Act

89. Atkins v. Holder, 529 Fed. Appx. 318 (4th Cir. 2013).

90. Torres v. House of Representatives of the Commonwealth of P.R., 858 F.Supp.2d 172 (D.P.R. 2012).

91. Olsen v. Capital Region Medical Center, 713 F.3d 1149 (8th Cir. 2013).

92. Majors v. General Electric Co., 714 F.3d 527 (7th Cir. 2013).

Battleground After the ADA Amendments Act93. Id. at 535.

Qualified Under the ADA: The New Legal

94. See, e.g., Bisker v. GGS Information Services, Inc., 2010 WL 2265979 (M.D. Pa.

June 2, 2010).

95. EEOC Enforcement Guidance: Reasonable Accommodation and Undue Hardship Under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Available at: http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/ docs/accommodation.html.

96. 42 U.S.C. § 12201(h).

97. Walker v. Venetian Casino Resort, LLC, 2012 WL 4794149, at *14-15 (D. Nev. Oct.

9, 2012).

98. 42 U.S.C. § 12113(a).

99. 29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(r).

100.29 C.F.R. § 1630.2(r) (relevant factors include: (1) the duration of the risk; (2) the nature and severity of the potential harm; (3) the likelihood that the potential harm will occur; and (4) the imminence of the potential harm).

101.Nelson v. City of New York, 2013 WL 4437224 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 19, 2013).

102.Id. at *9.

103.E.E.O.C. v. Amego, Inc., 110 F.3d 135, as 144 (1st Cir. 1997).

104.E.E.O.C. v. Browning-Ferris, Inc., 262 F.Supp.2d 577, 586 (D. Md. 2002).

105.Hutton v. Elf Atochem North America, 273 F.3d 884 (9th Cir. 2001).

106.Nelson v. City of New York, 2013 WL 4437224 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 19, 2013).

107.Hutton v. Elf Atochem North America, 273 F.3d 884 (9th Cir. 2001).

108.Mayo v. PCC Structurals, Inc., 2013 WL 3333055 (D. Ore. July 1, 2013).

109.Cleveland v. Policy Management Systems Corp., 526 U.S. 795 (1999).

110.Id. at 802-803.

111.Smith v. Clark Cnty. Sch. Dist., 727 F.3d 950 (9th Cir. 2013).

112.Solomon v. Vilsack, 628 F.3d 555, 561 (D.C. Cir. 2010).

113.Butler v. Vill. of Round Lake Police Dep't, 585 F.3d 1020, 1022 (7th Cir. 2009) (noting that the estoppel principles apply more readily than in SSDI claims because Brief No. 22 May 2014 Qualified Under the ADA: The New Legal Battleground After the ADA Amendments Act the Illinois Pension Code has no equivalent to SSDI’s list of specified conditions where benefits are extended automatically).

114.Smith v. Clark Cnty. Sch. Dist., 727 F.3d 950, 956 (9th Cir. 2013).

115.Butler v. Vill. of Round Lake Police Dep't, 585 F.3d 1020, 1023 (7th Cir. 2009).

116.Ryan v. Pace Suburban Bus Div. of Reg'l Transp. Auth., 2012 WL 5077725 (N.D.

–  –  –

Brief No. 22

Pages:     | 1 |   ...   | 5 | 6 ||


Similar works:

«Armenians and Terror Chronology 1973-1986 January 27, 1973 Santa Barbara, USA: Armenian-American citizen Gourgen Yanikyan (Yanikian) murdered Turkish Ambassadors, Mehmet Baydar and Bahadir Demir. Yanikyan was sentenced to life-long prison. April 4, 1973 Paris, France: Turkish Embassy and THY (Turkish Airlines) offices were attacked with bombs. Severe damage was reported. July 2, 1973. Gourgen Yanikyan, who triggered the Armenian terror by assassinating 2 Turkish Ambassadors in Santa Barbara was...»

«Page 1 Case Name: M v. M Between M. M., Applicant/Responding Party, and V. M., Respondent/Moving Party [2012] O.J. No. 5203 2012 ONSC 6271 Court File No. 34723/12 Ontario Superior Court of Justice D.K. Gray J. Heard: October 31, 2012. Judgment: November 5, 2012. (69 paras.) Family law Custody and access Practice and procedure Orders Motion by husband to set aside order dismissed Order related to custody, access and child support was made at uncontested trial after husband failed to respond...»

«THE IMPLICATIONS OF “ETERNITY CLAUSES”: THE GERMAN EXPERIENCE Ulrich K. Preuss *. This paper explores the conceptual possibility and implications of the concept of unconstitutional constitutional amendments. In the first section, the author argues that unconstitutional constitutional norms are conceptually impossible within the conventional hierarchical model of norms. In the second section, the author discusses the normative particularity of the amending power and concludes that an...»

«THE HAMLYN LECTURES NINETEENTH SERIES THE CONTRIBUTION OF ENGLISH LAW TO SOUTH AFRICAN LAW; AND THE RULE OF LAW IN SOUTH AFRICA AUSTRALIA The Law Book Company Ltd. Sydney : Melbourne : Brisbane CANADA AND U.S.A. The Carswell Company Ltd. Toronto INDIA N. M. Tripathi Private Ltd. Bombay ISRAEL Steimatzky's Agency Ltd. Jerusalem : Tel Aviv : Haifa NEW ZEALAND Sweet & Maxwell (N.Z.) Ltd. Wellington PAKISTAN Pakistan Law House Karachi SOUTH AFRICA Juta & Co. Ltd. Cape Town THE CONTRIBUTION OF...»

«The Family Project Sermon Series Part 1 You Are Here Introduction We are natural-born question askers. Before children leave home, they will ask more than 250,000 questions. Question asking is hardwired into our hearts from birth. Questions such as.Where do I belong?Where do I fit?What is my purpose?Is my life significant? The home is the first place where we find answers to our deepest questions. So where did your home receive the authority to take on such a big job? How does a home answer...»

«Selected Post-Booker and Guideline Application Decisions for the Eleventh Circuit Prepared by the Office of General Counsel U.S. Sentencing Commission July 2015 Disclaimer: This document provided by the Commission=s legal staff is offered to assist in understanding and applying the sentencing guidelines. The information in this document does not necessarily represent the official position of the Commission, and it should not be considered definitive or comprehensive. The information in this...»

«The Queensland Environmental Law Association 2007 Conference Proceedings Your System or Mine? Peppers Salt Resort and Spa Kingscliff, northern New South Wales 16 18 May 2007 Major Sponsor Your System or Mine? Conference Theme In recognition of the QELA 2007 Conference being held in New South Wales, part of the program is devoted to a comparative analysis of the planning and environment regimes operating in Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria with a view to ascertaining whether there are...»

«Rennie, R. (2012) The lodge with three names: Lubbock v Perkins. Edinburgh Law Review, 16 (3). pp. 438-445. ISSN 1364-9809 Copyright © 2012 Edinburgh Law Review Trust and the Contributors A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge The content must not be changed in any way or reproduced in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holder(s) When referring to this work, full bibliographic details must be...»

«Indonesia: Biofuel Development Page 1 of 7 INDONESIA: BIOFUEL DEVELOPMENT Author: Anasia Silviati Date: August 2008 Summary Indonesia started to develop the biofuel industry in 2006. The increase in mineral oil prices and the subsequent reduction of the fuel subsidy have considerably improved the feasibility of biofuel in Indonesia. In promoting the production of biofuel, the Indonesian government already had a number of legal instruments, including the Presidential Decree No. 5/2006 on...»

«Business: Concurrent Breakout DIP Financing Is It Back, and if So, Who Is Playing and on What Terms? James S. Rankin, Jr. Robert Grammen, Moderator Parker Hudson Rainer & Dobbs LLP; Atlanta EFO Financial Group LLC; Naples DISCOVER NEW Online Tool Researches ALL ABI Resources Online Research for $275 per Year* NOT per Minute!With ABI’s New Search: • One search gives you access to content across ALL ABI online resources Journal, educational materials, circuit court opinions, Law Review and...»

«This opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. § 480A.08, subd. 3 (2008). STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS A09-0104 Melissa Stang, Appellant, vs. ThreeQuarters LLC, et al., Respondents. Filed October 6, 2009 Reversed and remanded Collins, Judge* Hennepin County District Court File No. 27-CV-07-26682 Douglas E. Schmidt, Schmidt Law Firm, 13911 Ridgedale Drive, Suite 110, Minnetonka, MN 55305 (for appellant) James A. Reding, Amanda J.G. Karls,...»

«Revised transcript of evidence taken before The Select Committee on the European Union Justice Sub-Committee Inquiry on THE POTENTIAL IMPACT ON EU LAW OF REPEALING HUMAN RIGHTS ACT Evidence Session No. 8 Heard in Public Questions 79 90 TUESDAY 2 FEBRUARY 2016 11 am Witnesses: Rt Hon Mr Michael Gove MP and Mr Dominic Raab MP USE OF THE TRANSCRIPT 1. This is a corrected transcript of evidence taken in public and webcast on www.parliamentlive.tv. 1 Members present Baroness Kennedy of The Shaws...»





 
<<  HOME   |    CONTACTS
2016 www.dissertation.xlibx.info - Dissertations, online materials

Materials of this site are available for review, all rights belong to their respective owners.
If you do not agree with the fact that your material is placed on this site, please, email us, we will within 1-2 business days delete him.