Browse articles by year: 2016 (9)
Newsletter articles from 2005
Inconsistent assertions regarding disabilities made in ADA complaints and in applications for disability benefits
As a consequence of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Cleveland v. Policy Management Sys. Corp., 526 U.S. 795 (1999), discussed below, an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) lawsuit plaintiff who also has filed one or more applications for disability benefits clearly is required to explain the apparent inconsistency between (a) statements on the application(s) that the applicant is unable to work, and (b) allegations in the ADA complaint that the plaintiff is able to perform the job’s essential functions.
The MMPI-Medical examination or not?
In a recent case, Karraker v. Rent-A-Center, 2005 W.L. 1389443 (7th Cir. 2005), the use of the Minnesota Multi-Phasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) was addressed by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.
What is adverse to one may not be adverse to all in retaliation cases
In Washington v. Illinois Department of Revenue, 2005 WL 2000986 (7th Cir. 2005, August 22, 2005), the Seventh Circuit reversed a grant of summary judgment in favor of the employer, finding that switching an employee’s hours, but not position or rate of pay, may constitute an adverse action.
Work authorization updates
All employers must ensure proper completion of the Employment Eligibility Verification form (Form I-9) for each newly hired employee, including U.S. citizens and aliens.