Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Williams
E560320
Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Williams is a 2002 U.S. Supreme Court case that narrowly interpreted the definition of "disability" under the Americans with Disabilities Act, prompting Congress to later broaden that definition through the ADA Amendments Act of 2008.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Williams canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T5951103 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
Target entity: Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Williams Context triple: [Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act of 2008, respondsTo, Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Williams]
-
A.
MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co.
MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co. is a landmark 1916 New York Court of Appeals case that expanded manufacturers’ liability in negligence to consumers, even without privity of contract.
-
B.
Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.
Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. is a landmark 1983 U.S. Supreme Court administrative law case that clarified the "arbitrary and capricious" standard for judicial review of agency rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act.
-
C.
California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited
California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited is a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed the limits of First Amendment petitioning rights when parties allegedly use governmental and judicial processes as part of an anticompetitive scheme in violation of antitrust laws.
-
D.
Lucas v. Earl
Lucas v. Earl is a landmark 1930 U.S. Supreme Court tax law case that established the principle that income is taxed to the person who earns it, regardless of contractual arrangements to split or assign that income.
-
E.
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green is a 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that established the key burden-shifting framework for proving employment discrimination under Title VII.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
Target entity: Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Williams Target entity description: Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Williams is a 2002 U.S. Supreme Court case that narrowly interpreted the definition of "disability" under the Americans with Disabilities Act, prompting Congress to later broaden that definition through the ADA Amendments Act of 2008.
-
A.
MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co.
MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co. is a landmark 1916 New York Court of Appeals case that expanded manufacturers’ liability in negligence to consumers, even without privity of contract.
-
B.
Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.
Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. is a landmark 1983 U.S. Supreme Court administrative law case that clarified the "arbitrary and capricious" standard for judicial review of agency rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act.
-
C.
California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited
California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking Unlimited is a 1972 U.S. Supreme Court case that addressed the limits of First Amendment petitioning rights when parties allegedly use governmental and judicial processes as part of an anticompetitive scheme in violation of antitrust laws.
-
D.
Lucas v. Earl
Lucas v. Earl is a landmark 1930 U.S. Supreme Court tax law case that established the principle that income is taxed to the person who earns it, regardless of contractual arrangements to split or assign that income.
-
E.
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green
McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green is a 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision that established the key burden-shifting framework for proving employment discrimination under Title VII.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (46)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
Americans with Disabilities Act case
ⓘ
United States Supreme Court case ⓘ court case ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
disability discrimination
ⓘ
labor and employment law ⓘ |
| arguedDate | 2001-11-07 ⓘ |
| citation |
122 S. Ct. 681
ⓘ
151 L. Ed. 2d 615 ⓘ 534 U.S. 184 ⓘ |
| concernsStatute | 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. ⓘ |
| country |
United States of America
ⓘ
surface form:
United States
|
| criticizedFor | overly restrictive interpretation of disability ⓘ |
| decidedInYear | 2002 ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 2002-01-08 ⓘ |
| decisionType | unanimous decision ⓘ |
| docketNumber | 00-1089 ⓘ |
| employmentContext | assembly line work at an automobile manufacturing plant ⓘ |
| geographicContext | Kentucky NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasCourt | Supreme Court of the United States NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasJurisdiction | United States federal law ⓘ |
| hasPetitioner | Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasRespondent | Ella Williams NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| holding |
Inability to perform specific job-related manual tasks is not sufficient by itself to establish a disability under the ADA.
ⓘ
The impairment’s impact must also be permanent or long term to qualify as a disability under the ADA. ⓘ To be substantially limited in performing manual tasks, an individual must have an impairment that prevents or severely restricts activities that are of central importance to most people’s daily lives. ⓘ |
| impact |
narrowed coverage of individuals considered disabled until statutory amendment
ⓘ
prompted congressional clarification of the ADA’s definition of disability ⓘ |
| influenced | enactment of the ADA Amendments Act of 2008 ⓘ |
| interpretsTerm |
disability under the ADA
ⓘ
major life activities ⓘ substantially limits ⓘ |
| involvesParty | Toyota Motor Corporation affiliate in Kentucky ⓘ |
| keyIssue |
scope of major life activity of performing manual tasks
ⓘ
whether the respondent was disabled within the meaning of the ADA ⓘ |
| languageOfRecord | English ⓘ |
| laterInterpretedBy | federal courts applying the ADA prior to 2009 ⓘ |
| legalSubject |
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
employment discrimination law ⓘ |
| lowerCourt | United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| opinionBy | Justice Sandra Day O’Connor NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| overruledByStatute | ADA Amendments Act of 2008 NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| precedentialStatus | binding precedent on federal courts prior to ADA Amendments Act of 2008 ⓘ |
| proceduralPosture | review of a decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit ⓘ |
| relatedTo | ADA Amendments Act of 2008 NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| result |
made it more difficult for plaintiffs to qualify as disabled under the ADA
ⓘ
narrowed the definition of disability under the ADA ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Subject: Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Williams Description of subject: Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Williams is a 2002 U.S. Supreme Court case that narrowly interpreted the definition of "disability" under the Americans with Disabilities Act, prompting Congress to later broaden that definition through the ADA Amendments Act of 2008.
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.