Search
RSS
Subscribe

Enter your email address to receive new posts in your inbox:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Share

Like what you see? Share!

Twitter
Verrill Dana, LLP

Verrill Dana, LLP is one of New England's preeminent regional law firms. With offices in Portland and Augusta, ME; Boston, MA; Westport, CT; Providence, RI; and Washington D.C. Verrill Dana provides sophisticated legal representation to businesses and individuals in the traditional areas of litigation, real estate, business law, labor and employment law, employee benefits, environmental law, intellectual property and estate planning.  The Firm also has industry-focused specialties including higher education, health care and health technology, energy, and timberlands. 

Disclaimer:  The content presented in this blog is for general information only, is not intended to constitute legal advice and cannot be relied upon by any person as legal advice. While we welcome you to contact our blog authors at hrlawupdate@verrilldana.com, the submission of a comment or question does not create an attorney-client relationship between the Firm and you. 

Entries in Disability Discrimination (2)

Wednesday
Apr062016

Obesity and the ADA: Does 33% of the U.S. Population Have ADA Protection as a Result of Obesity?

Yesterday, the Eighth Circuit issued an opinion in Morriss v. BNSF Railway Co., No. 14-3858 (April 5, 2016), rejecting the plaintiff’s argument that obesity (in and of itself) is sufficient to maintain an ADA claim. The Eighth Circuit joins the Sixth Circuit and the Second Circuit in coming to this conclusion.

Melvin Morriss filed suit alleging that BNSF Railway Company refused to hire him on account of his obesity, and thereby discriminated against him in violation of the ADAAA and the Nebraska Fair Employment Practice Act. The action alleged both disability discrimination and “regarded as” discrimination.

Click to read more ...

Friday
Apr012016

Female Who Keeps Position Plus Male Who Loses Position Equals Discrimination Claim Surviving Motion to Dismiss

Last month, a federal judge in the Eastern District of Michigan denied the U.S. Postal Service’s Motion to Dismiss a claim of sex, military, and disability discrimination. The claim was premised on the allegation of a former employee who claimed he was fired when he became ineligible for a promotion as a result of a math deficiency and was denied the ability to return to a lesser position. (Edgin v. Brennan, No. 1:14-cv-14527 (E.D. Mich. Mar. 10, 2016).

The claim was permitted to proceed because the plaintiff (appearing pro se) had alleged that at least one female co-worker who was not disabled and who was not a veteran, but who was also deemed unqualified for a promotion she sought, was permitted to return to a lower-ranked job she was qualified for.

Click to read more ...