Case Citator › Lewis v. Humboldt Acquisition Corp., Inc.

Lewis v. Humboldt Acquisition Corp., Inc.

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Good law
Court
Sixth Circuit
Citation
681 F.3d 312
Decided
Confirmed treatments
0
Flagged citations read
169 of 169
Citing cases (total)
357
Good law
Every flagged citation to this case has been read, and none of them overrules, limits, or questions it. Lewis v. Humboldt Acquisition Corp., Inc. remains good law: all 169 flagged citations have been read, and none adversely treated it. The citing opinions applied Lewis's ADA but-for causation rule or identified Lewis as the en banc authority that abrogated older Sixth Circuit cases such as Monette v. Electronic Data Systems Corp. and Macy v. Hopkins County School Board of Education.
More on how this was screened

The nearby treatment language consistently described Lewis's treatment of those older precedents rather than any later court's treatment of Lewis itself. Source review: Tuttle v. Baptist Health Medical Group, notes statutory doubt attributed to Guzman v. WHM Carib, LLC. Guzman expressly declined to decide whether the 2008 ADA amendment changed Lewis's but-for rule: “this Court need not address this question now because, regardless of the standard applied, Plaintiffs ADA claims are doomed from the very start.” Tuttle applied Lewis, and Natofsky v. City of New York, joined its causation rule.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

357 later cases cite Lewis v. Humboldt Acquisition Corp., Inc.; 169 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Lewis v. Humboldt Acquisition Corp., Inc.?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

No reviewed court has overruled or limited this case.

Every one of the 169 flagged citations was read, and each turned out to be something other than adverse treatment: a routine application, a party's argument the court rejected, or the case itself discussing older law. That reading is the finding this page exists to report.

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Lewis v. Humboldt Acquisition Corp., Inc. and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace