Brown v. District of Columbia

Docket Number17-7152
Decision Date05 July 2019
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
18 cases
  • In re Suboxone (Buprenorphine Hydrochloride & Nalaxone) Antitrust Litig.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Pennsylvania
    • September 26, 2019
    ...identical, only that it be beneficial." Sykes v. Mel S. Harris & Assoc., LLC, 780 F.3d 70 (2d Cir. 2015) ; see also Brown v. District of Columbia, 928 F.3d 1070, 1083 (2019) (holding that Rule 23(b)(2) requires that a single injunction or declaratory judgment provide relief to each member o......
  • Parent/Professional Advocacy League v. City of Springfield
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
    • August 8, 2019
    ...impermissible as to all individuals). The same is true for the case cited in their Rule 28(j) letter. See Brown v. D.C., 928 F.3d 1070, 1082 (D.C. Cir. 2019) (seeing sufficient commonality where "common proof will establish whether the District’s plan is ‘comprehensive’ and ‘effectively wor......
  • Murphy v. Harpstead
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Minnesota
    • September 27, 2019
    ...at 279. It is sufficient that Plaintiffs' requested accommodation will lead only to an increased opportunity to move. Id. ; see also Brown , 928 F.3d at 1082. Notwithstanding, as discussed above, there are disputes of material fact regarding whether Named Plaintiffs would have moved, or wou......
  • United States v. Florida
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Florida
    • July 14, 2023
    ...the modifications would fundamentally alter the nature of the service, program, or activity."); see, e.g., Brown v. District of Columbia, 928 F.3d 1070, 1077-78 (D.C. Cir. 2019) (collecting cases). At summary judgment, the State prevailed on its substantial modification defense with respect......
  • Get Started for Free
1 books & journal articles
  • Disability Law and HIV Criminalization.
    • United States
    • Yale Law Journal Vol. 130 No. 6, April 2021
    • April 1, 2021
    ...into the circuit split as to whether Section 12132 requires but-for or motivating-factor causation. See Brown v. District of Columbia, 928 F.3d 1070, 1098-99 (D.C. Cir. 2019) (Wilkins, J., concurring) (noting the existence of a circuit split and collecting (135.) See Olmstead v. L.C. ex rel......