Nathanson v. Medical College of Pennsylvania
United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
926 F.2d 1368 (1991)
- Written by Alexander Hager-DeMyer, JD
Facts
Jayne Nathanson (plaintiff) suffered back and neck injuries in a car accident, and some pain continued after completion of physical therapy. After the accident, Nathanson decided to attend medical school. Nathanson took prerequisite courses at two different universities and eventually applied for admission at the Medical College of Pennsylvania (college) (defendant). During her admissions interviews, Nathanson informed the college interviewers about her accident and injuries but stated that she believed she would not need special accommodations in the program because she had not experienced problems during her prior coursework. Nathanson was admitted to the program and almost immediately ran into physical difficulties due to parking and seating arrangements that triggered her injuries. Nathanson communicated with several faculty members and administrators during her first year, but the parties disputed the content and timeline of those communications. Nathanson alleged that she disclosed that she was experiencing physical pain, asked for generalized assistance including better seating and closer parking, and eventually requested to defer classes for a year. Due to a lack of response from the college and continued difficulties with parking and seating, Nathanson withdrew from the program and filed suit against the college in federal district court. The district court granted summary judgment for the college, and Nathanson appealed to the Third Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Scirica, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.