SUE PRITCHARD, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
SOUTHERN COMPANY SERVICES, DON WELLIVER, AND JEFF PRINCE, DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES

11th Cir. | 1996-12-13
No. 95-6312
Before CARNES, Circuit Judge, and FAY and GIBSON , Senior Circuit Judges.
102 F.3d 1118 Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (1996) Positive Treatment
Cited by 26 cases
Opinion of the Court

Before CARNES, Circuit Judge, and FAY and GIBSON , Senior Circuit Judges. ORDER: Appellees’ Petition for Rehearing is denied except as to a modification of the last paragraph of our opinion clarifying the status of the individual officers of Southern Company Services, Inc. Part IV Conclusion is amended to read: IV.

CONCLUSION We conclude that the District Court erred when it granted SCSI summary judgment under the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act. We REVERSE that part of its decision. We AFFIRM summary judgment in favor of SCSI as to the Title VII claim, and we also affirm summary judgment in favor of Don Welliver and Jeff Prince as to all claims. . Pritchard’s remedy for any discrimination she may have suffered on account of her alleged disability lies against her employer, not individual officers of her employer. See Mason v. Stallings, 82 F. 3d 1007, 1009 (11th Cir.1996).

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By (18 total)

  • Shotz v. City OF Plantation, 344 F.3d 1161 (11th Cir. 2003)
    …This reasoning, however, embraces an academic debate that we are not willing to enter. . For cases involving a violation of the ADA’s general anti-discrimination provision in employment, 42 U.S.C. § 12112(a), see, e.g., Pritchard v. So. Co. Servs., 102 F. 3d 1118, 1119 n. 7 (11th Cir.1996) (citing Mason v. Stallings, 82 F. 3d 1007, 1009 (11th Cir.1996) (holding that individual liability is precluded for violations of § 12112(a) because “[t]he definition of 'employer' in the Disabilities Act is like the defin…
  • Stewart v. Happy Herman's Cheshire Bridge, Inc., 117 F.3d 1278 (11th Cir. 1997)
    …imits one or more of the major life activities of such individual; a record of such an impairment; or is regarded as having such an impairment. 42 U.S.C. § 12102; Pritchard v. Southern Co. Services, 92 F. 3d 1130, 1132 (11th Cir.), amended on reh’g, 102 F. 3d 1118 (11th Cir.1996). When individuals claim that they are substantially limited in the major life activity of “working,” their condition “must significantly restrict [their] ability to perform either a class of jobs or a broad range of jobs in various…
  • Hilburn v. Murata Elecs. N. Am., Inc., 181 F.3d 1220 (11th Cir. 1999)
    …is most favorable to the non-moving party. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c); see United States v. Diebold, Inc., 369 U.S. 654, 655, 82 S.Ct. 993, 8 L.Ed.2d 176 (1962); Pritchard v. Southern Co. Servs., 92 F. 3d 1130, 1132 (11th Cir.), amended in part on reh’g by 102 F. 3d 1118 (11th Cir.1996). Thus, the court must “avoid weighing conflicting evidence or making credibility determinations.” Hairston v. Gainesville Sun Publ'g Co., 9 F. 3d 913, 919 (11th Cir.1994). It is not the role of the court to weigh the facts. Hairs…

Previewing 3 of 18 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw