Articles Discussing The Definition of Disability Under the ADA
Under the Americans With Disabilities Act Amendments Act (ADAAA), employers have a viable defense to an Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) “regarded as” claim if the impairment in question was “transitory and minor,” although transitory and minor impairments are ill-defined.
The Americans with Disabilities Act protects most job applicants and employees from discrimination, harassment, or retaliation based on disability. While employers are likely familiar with many of the physical and mental conditions that are commonly considered disabilities, one gaining more and more attention is obesity.
In a case of first impression, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit recently held in Williams v. Kincaid that individuals with gender dysphoria may be protected under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
In what may be the first in a wave of decisions concerning COVID-19 and disability bias, the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama determined that a nursing assistant who was fired for following COVID-19 quarantine protocols after testing positive and presenting symptoms can pursue her
The federal Departments of Health and Human Services and Justice issued guidance recently regarding “long COVID,” a condition afflicting some COVID-19 victims.
Mark Adams, a partner in the Labor & Employment Practice Group, and Jacob Pritt, an associate in the Labor & Employment Practice Group, wrote the article “5th Circuit Rejects Disability Discrimination Claim Based on Alcoholism,” republished by HR Daily Advisor.
Executive Summary: The Southern District Court of California, in Ruiz v. ParadigmWorks Group, Inc., held that an employer was not at fault for failing to grant an employee’s request for multiple medical leaves of absence where the employee was totally disabled and she could not provide a “finite end date to [her] total disability.”
A federal court in New York dismissed all claims asserted by a recovering alcoholic under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act for numerous reasons including that he did not show he was “disabled.” Johnson v. N.Y. State Office of Alcoholism & Substance Abuse Servs., No. 16-cv-9769 (S.D.N.Y. March 13, 2018).
On July 12, 2017, the EEOC filed suit in the Middle District of North Carolina alleging that an employer violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by refusing a request to telecommute from an employee with a sensitivity to workplace smells.
In 2009, Congress passed the Americans With Disabilities Amendments Act (ADAAA), unquestionably expanding the definition of a disability under the ADA and, for all practical purposes in most cases, shifting the focus of disability lawsuits in federal court.
Today, after a two year wait, the Department of Justice will publish its final rule amending the ADA regulations to incorporate the 2008 statutory changes set forth in the ADAAA, which took effect on January 1, 2009.
Congress passed the Americans with Disabilities Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA) over five years ago on Sept.17, 2008. The act’s stated purpose was to reinstate “a broad scope of protection to be available under the ADA” as the result of several decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court that had created an “inappropriately high level of limitation necessary to obtain coverage under the ADA.”
In late January, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held in Summers v. Altarum Institute Corp., No. 13-1645 (4th Cir. Jan. 23, 2014), that “a sufficiently severe temporary impairment may constitute a disability.” This opinion is the first published federal appellate court opinion to apply the expanded definition of disability contained in the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act of 2008 (ADAAA).