Skip to main contentSettlementPlaintiff WinMixed ResultSettlementMixed Result
Case Details
- Nature of Suit
- 442 Civil Rights: Jobs
- Status
- Unknown
- Procedural Posture
- appeal
- State
- Kansas
- Circuit
- 10th Circuit
Related Laws
No specific laws identified for this ruling.
Claim Types
Discrimination
Outcome
This is a dissenting opinion from an appellate judge disagreeing with the majority's affirmance of a trial court order requiring the appellant to submit to a physical examination under Pennsylvania's Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Act. The dissent argues the trial court failed to meet the 'good cause' standard.
Browse more:Discrimination cases
Similar Rulings
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Taco Bell Corp.
W.D. Tenn.Sep 2008
Shelley Savage v. Glendale Union High School, District No. 205, Maricopa County
9th CircuitSep 2003
Sheet Metal Workers
U.S. Supreme CourtJul 1986
Killmer, Lane & Newman, LLP Mari Newman and Towards Justice v. BKP, Inc. Ella Bliss Beauty Bar LLC Ella
Colo.Sep 2023
Elana Back v. Hastings on Hudson Union Free School District, John J. Russell, Anne Brennan, Marilyn Wishnie
2nd CircuitApr 2004
Facing something similar at work?
Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.
This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.