Final Federal Regulations

Hockey, Ice Hockey, Puck, Hockey Stick

Picture of Hockey helmet, puck, and stick (brown and black colors).

Before getting started on the blog entry of the day, Dr. Bob Emmons, a forensic psychiatrist, and I just published a peer-reviewed paper in the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons entitled, “The Americans with Disabilities Act and Appropriateness of Referral In

Previously, we have blogged on a case involving Julian Vargas and the inaccessibility of kiosk equipment used by Quest diagnostics. It turns out that he is involved in a similar case involving Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings with another plaintiff, Luke Davis. A district Court in California approved a class under the California antidiscrimination law,

Today’s blog entry come from the Supreme Court of Maryland in a case called In the Matter of Antavis Chavis, here. The case, a 4-3 decision in favor of the plaintiff, should have high-stakes testing entities, and even colleges, and universities reevaluating the documentation they demand before deciding to make accommodations/modifications for an individual

I hope those that celebrated had a happy Hanukkah. Merry Christmas, happy new year, and happy holidays to everyone.

Today’s blog entry is my top 11 or so for the year. As is my past practice, I have included important blog entries that do not make the list . Most of those though were

I hope everyone had a fantastic Thanksgiving weekend. Today’s blog entry goes to the dogs literally. The blog entry talks about two different cases involving service animals and how the court system deals with them. My thanks to Prof. Leonard Sandler, clinical law professor at the University of Iowa Law School for sending along the

Happy thanksgiving week everyone!!!

Today’s blog entry is the complaint, here, and consent decree, here, in U.S. v. City of Blaine, MN. The case has incredible parallels to what is going on in the world of health care professionals and Physician Health Programs (substance abuse programs such as discussed in this case,

Today’s blog entry is not on an issue that I have blogged on previously. It deals with the question of what happens when a person leaves employment and was otherwise qualified during that employment, but after the employment ends, some discriminatory action occurs. Does title I apply since the person is no longer otherwise qualified/qualified?