Legal Opinion
Riechmann v. Cutler-Hammer, Inc.
District Court, D. Kansas
Decided September 12, 2001No. CIV. A. 99-2052-CMPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
MURGUIA, District Judge.
Pending before the court is plaintiff Sandra Riechmann’s motion for judgment as a matter of law (Doc. 90). Plaintiff asserts that, as a matter of law, defendants have failed to establish that medical inquiries made of plaintiff were job-related and consistent with business necessity. Accordingly, plaintiff asserts she is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on her Americans with Disabilities Act medical inquiry claim. In addition, plaintiff seeks the court to award her a new trial and grant her injunctive relief. For the reasons set forth below,…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- City of Los Angeles v. LyonsSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Griggs v. Duke Power Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1971
- McDonough Power Equipment, Inc. v. GreenwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Harolds Stores, Inc. v. Dillard Department Stores, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1996
- Joe E. Cooper, Plaintiff-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Asplundh Tree Expert Company, Defendant-Appellant/cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1988
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Conrad v. Board of Johnson County CommissionersDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 2002
- Fountain v. New York State Department of Correctional ServicesDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2002
- Conroy v. New York State Department of Correctional ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2003
- Conroy v. New York State Department Of Correctional ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2003