the essential functions of the position sought, and then whether Adkins could perform the essential functions with or without a reasonable accommodation. Essential Functions Generally, the determination of whether a given function is essential is a factual question for the jury and thus not suitable for resolution by summary judgment. See Hall v. U.S. Postal Serv., 857 F.2d 1073, 1078-79 (6th Cir.1988); see also Skerski v. Time Warner Cable Co., 257 F.3d 273, 283 (3d Cir.2001) (remanding for trial after summary judgment for employer because motions court incorrectly decided that rea sonable jurors could only find that working at heights is an essential element of the cable television installer technician position); Brickers v. Cleveland Bd. of Educ., 145 F.3d 846, 849 (6th Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>). In Hall, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
recognizing the general rule that a rule 12f motion is decided on the pleadings but treating the motion as for summary judgment because the record had been developed by the parties as undisputed facts recognizing rule recognizing this as the general rule recognizing general rule but treating as legal question because ohio statute set out qualifications for position that were not met by applicant recognizing general rule