finding that the plaintiff who was unable to work in a particular lab due to allergies was not disabled under the Rehabilitation Act
Summary of this case from Logan v. PotterNo. 92-779.
February 22, 1993, October TERM, 1992.
C.A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 971 F. 2d 1487.
finding that the plaintiff who was unable to work in a particular lab due to allergies was not disabled under the Rehabilitation Act
Summary of this case from Logan v. Potterdenying discovery of names of participants in a medical study due to privacy interests of the individual participants
Summary of this case from Johnson v. City of Reddingdenying discovery of names of participants in a medical study due to privacy interests of the individual participants
Summary of this case from Roettgen v. Fostondenying discovery of names of participants in a medical study due to privacy interests of the individual participants
Summary of this case from Roettgen v. Fostondenying discovery of names of participants in a medical study due to privacy interests of the individual participants
Summary of this case from Guthrey v. California Dep't of Corr. & Rehab.denying discovery of names of participants in a medical study due to privacy interests of the individual participants
Summary of this case from James v. Scribnerdenying discovery of names of participants in a medical study due to privacy interests of the individual participants
Summary of this case from Escalante v. City of Delanodenying discovery of names of participants in a medical study due to privacy interests of the individual participants
Summary of this case from Rodriguez v. City of FresnoFull title:JOHNSON ET AL. v. THOMPSON ET AL
Court:U.S.
Date published: Feb 22, 1993
It is well established that a court is compelled to enforce an administrative subpoena, if the court…
Guthrey v. California Dep't of Corr. & Rehab.Federal Courts ordinarily recognize a constitutionally-based right of privacy that can be raised in response…