Legal Opinion
Perdue v. Murphy
Indiana Court of Appeals
Decided October 27, 2009No. 49A02-0901-CV-8PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BRADFORD, Judge.
In this interlocutory appeal we conclude that the plaintiffs' proposed Class B, which names all welfare applicants with disabilities in the State of Indiana who require reasonable accommodation and have been or will be denied benefits due to their alleged failure to cooperate with the FSSA on any number of grounds, is too broad to constitute a manageable class action under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 2 ("ADA") and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 3 ("RA"). We further conclude, however, that a more specific eclass could perhaps be defined. Accordingly, we…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Raytheon Co. v. HernandezSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- McClain v. Lufkin Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2008
- Hainze v. RichardsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2000
- Hohider v. United Parcel Service, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2009
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Jewell v. City of IndianapolisIndiana Court of Appeals · 2011
- Chaney v. CLARIAN HEALTH PARTNERS, INC.Indiana Court of Appeals · 2011
- Farno v. Ansure Mortuaries of Indiana, LLCIndiana Court of Appeals · 2011
- Perdue v. MurphyIndiana Court of Appeals · 2010
- John Aikman v. City of IndianapolisIndiana Court of Appeals · 2013