Legal Opinion
Laresca v. American Telephone & Telegraph
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided May 10, 2001No. Civ:99-5097 (WGB)PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BASSLER, District Judge.
Defendant American Telephone & Telegraph (“Defendant” or “AT & T”) moves for summary judgment under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 56. 1 Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is granted.
I. BACKGROUND
A. Facts
In 1984, Plaintiff Paul D. LaResca (“Plaintiff’) began working for AT & T as a data processing clerk. Because of seizures caused by his epilepsy, Plaintiff was unable to drive to and from work. Accordingly, Plaintiff relied on family, friends, coworkers to drive him. Beginning in 1996, AT & T’s managers, aware of Plaintiffs epilepsy, accommodated…
2Cases cited42 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Texas Department of Community Affairs v. BurdineSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Johnson v. Community College of Allegheny CountyDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2008
- Regan v. Faurecia Automotive Seating, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2012
- Ravel v. Hewlett-Packard Enterprise, Inc.District Court, E.D. California · 2017
- Victor v. StateNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2008
- A.D.P. v. Exxonmobil Research & Engineering Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2012
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.