206 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10539554)
1. Supreme Court to rule on rights of people with disabilities.
Gold S
Caring; 1999 Jul; 18(7):26-7. PubMed ID: 10539554
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Community integration of individuals with disabilities: an update on Olmstead litigation.
Mathis J
Ment Phys Disabil Law Rep; 2001; 25(2):158-62. PubMed ID: 11381572
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. The Americans With Disabilities Act Amendments Act of 2008: implications for the forensic psychiatrist.
Scott CL
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2010; 38(1):95-9. PubMed ID: 20305081
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Approaches to implementing the Olmstead ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) ruling.
Jackson SR; Hafner G; O'Brien D; Benjamin G
J Law Med Ethics; 2003; 31(4 Suppl):47-8. PubMed ID: 14968621
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Using the Courts to Shape Medicaid Policy: Olmstead v. L.C. by Zimring and Its Community Integration Legacy.
Rosenbaum S
J Health Polit Policy Law; 2016 Aug; 41(4):585-97. PubMed ID: 27127257
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. The Americans with Disabilities Act: shattered aspirations and new hope.
Thomas VL; Gostin LO
JAMA; 2009 Jan; 301(1):95-7. PubMed ID: 19126814
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. The Americans with Disabilities Act: disabled by court decisions.
Coelho T
Neurology; 2007 May; 68(20):1733-6. PubMed ID: 17502557
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. CRIPA, Olmstead, and the transformation of the Oregon Psychiatric Security Review Board.
Bloom JD
J Am Acad Psychiatry Law; 2012; 40(3):383-9. PubMed ID: 22960921
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. New employment discrimination law: finally, protection for physicians!
Weber SM
Pa Med; 1992 Apr; 95(4):12-7. PubMed ID: 1533449
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Rights and dignity: Congress, the Supreme Court, and people with disabilities after Pennhurst.
Ferleger D; Scott PM
West New Engl Law Rev; 1983; 5(3):327-61. PubMed ID: 11658602
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
11. Supreme Court gives strict interpretation to Disabilities Act language. Toyota Motor Manufacturing v. Williams.
Hosp Law Newsl; 2002 May; 19(7):1-2. PubMed ID: 11989435
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
12. Supreme Court restricts ADA Title I as applied to the States.
Parry JW
Ment Phys Disabil Law Rep; 2001; 25(2):155-7. PubMed ID: 11381571
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. The tenuous nature of the Medicaid entitlement.
Jost TS
Health Aff (Millwood); 2003; 22(1):145-53. PubMed ID: 12528846
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Realizing the Promise of
Schwartz SJ; Fleischner RD; Schwartz AZ; Stephens EM
J Leg Med; 2020; 40(1):63-100. PubMed ID: 32400309
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. The Americans with Disabilities Act at 25: the highest expression of American values.
Gostin LO
JAMA; 2015 Jun; 313(22):2231-5. PubMed ID: 26057283
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. The Americans with Disabilities Act: implications of Supreme Court decisions for case managers. Part IV.
Vierling L
Case Manager; 2000; 11(4):51-5. PubMed ID: 11935612
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. U.S. Supreme Court rules ADA applies to correctional facilities.
AIDS Policy Law; 1998 Jun; 13(12):1, 8. PubMed ID: 11365515
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. The ADA and the Supreme Court: a mixed record.
Bagenstos SR
JAMA; 2015 Jun; 313(22):2217-8. PubMed ID: 26057276
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. Health law.
Gostin LO
JAMA; 1992 Jul; 268(3):364-6. PubMed ID: 1535384
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. National Council on Disability seeks to restore ADA.
Vierling LE
Case Manager; 2005; 16(2):26-9. PubMed ID: 15818340
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
