# Fraser v. Goodale

> Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · September 8, 2003 · 342 F.3d 1032

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8408194

## Case

- **Full name:** Rebecca Ann FRASER v. Carol GOODALE Jeff Erwin Terri McKinnis United States Bancorp, a federal insured banking corporation United States Bank National Assoc., a federal insured banking corporation
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- **Decided:** September 8, 2003
- **Citations:** 342 F.3d 1032; 2003 WL 22072079
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Tallman
- **Judges:** Lay, Tallman, Wallace
- **Cited by:** 718 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8408194

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- explaining that a reviewing court cannot “erroneously rely on evidence outside the summary judgment record” and that the court is “limited to the … evidence available to the court at the time the motion was made” (internal quotation marks and citations omitted) (ellipsis in or…
- explaining that whether a person is disabled under comparable ADA provision is an individualized inquiry, and finding a triable dispute as to whether plaintiffs diabetes was a disability because her treatment regimen substantially limited her in performing a major life activity
- explaining *1260 that the contexts of a diary could be admitted into evidence at trial “in a variety of ways” including having the diary’s writer “testify to all the relevant portions of the diary from her personal knowledge” or by using the diary to refresh her recollection
- holding that in analyzing whether a person’s impairment is substantially limiting, courts must consider “the nature and severity of the final impairment, the duration or expected duration of the impairment, as well as the permanent or long term impact of the impairment.”
- holding that, although plaintiffs diary may not be admissible, “[t]he contents of the diary are mere recitations of events within [plain-tiffl’s personal knowledge and [plaintiff] could testify to all the relevant portions”

## Opinion text

TALLMAN, Circuit Judge,
dissenting in part:
To “eat” means “to take in through the mouth as food: ingest, chew, and swallow in turn.” Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary 355 (1979). Nothing in this record suggests that Rebecca Fraser has any difficulty ingesting food, chewing food, or swallowing food. It follows that she is not substantially limited in the major life activity of eating, and I respectfully dissent from that portion of today’s opinion so holding.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8408194. Public record. Not legal advice.