Total Articles: 2
Ninth Circuit Divided on Applicable Proof for Disparate Impact ADA Claim Brought by Former Addict
A plaintiff must demonstrate some statistically significant evidence in support of his or her disparate impact claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the California Fair Employment and Housing Act, even though such evidence may be very difficult to obtain, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has held, in order to establish that his employer’s “one-strike” rule discriminates against recovering addicts who seek employment with the employer after previously failing its pre-employment drug test. Lopez v. Pacific Maritime Assoc., No. 09-55698 (9th Cir. Mar. 2, 2011). Dissenting partially from the decision, Judge Harry Pregerson vigorously argued in favor of permitting the disparate impact claim to move forward without any statistical evidence. The Court, nevertheless, was in agreement that no ADA or FEHA disparate treatment claim could survive under the employer’s uniform application of its one-strike rule.
Disparate Impact Suit - Credit Checks.
Three times a year for the last several years I have done a program for the UT School of Law, CLE group called Essential Employment Law. In the morning, I talk about theory and in the afternoon my good friend (and great lawyer) Connie Cornell talks about the practical application.
