This week’s blog entry is an update on a previous blog entry and a discussion of the recent Supreme Court decision in Comcast, which involves the causation standard for §1981. Of course, what we are interested in is whether Comcast necessarily means the Supreme Court will decide but for causation is the standard for ADA
Interactive Process and Essential Functions of the Job
Today’s case is a twofer. That is, we are going to talk about two different cases, both dealing with the interactive process and essential functions of the job. The first case is an unpublished decision from the 11th Circuit, Kassa v. Synovus Financial Corporation, decided February 3, 2020. The second case is Seward
Okay Boomer at the Supreme Court and What Does That Have to do with the ADA
I am not sure about blog entry times for the next couple of weeks. Next week, I will be attending and speaking at the Accessibility Professionals Association conference in Round Rock, Texas. Sometime within the next two weeks, I will be testifying as an expert witness in a trial in Houston. So, not sure when
Massage Envy Decided by 11th Circuit
Today’s blog entry will focus on the decision from the 11th Circuit decided September 12, 2019, on the Massage Envy case we discussed here. In this decision, the 11th Circuit affirmed the opinion of the lower court holding that regarded as does not apply to fear of a future disability. As mentioned
Is Causation Under Title I But For Causation? Ninth Circuit Says Yes; I Say No
Before starting on today’s blog entry, I do want to wish a speedy recovery to Justice Ginsburg. Regardless of your political views or your jurisprudential views, you can’t argue that Justice Ginsburg is not one of the legal titans of the late 20th and early 21st century. Wishing her a speedy recovery.
Legal Malpractice Risks and the ADA
Previously, I have talked about how the EEOC if it wasn’t the EEOC would have committed legal malpractice in the case we talked about here. From going through my search engine, it doesn’t seem like I have talked about where the legal malpractice risks are with respect to the ADA. In going through my
Causation Under ADA and Rehabilitation Act and a Bonus: LGT Goes to Supreme Court
Hope everyone had a happy Easter and, as in my case, a happy start to the Passover holiday. Today’s blog entry come from one of the blogs that is in my blog roll, Wait a Second. The case is Natofsky v. The City of New York decided on April 18, 2019 out of the Second
Litigation over commas: How far Does Title II Extend?
My colleague, Jon Hyman, has previously written about what can happen when commas are not used when they should be. You can find that blog entry here. Today’s blog entry raises the question as to what happens when a comma is used when perhaps it shouldn’t have been. The case is Haberle v.
ADA and the High School Athletic Association
Before starting the blog for this week, a couple of preliminary matters. First, about a month ago, I hit 300 blog posts. I simply could not do it without the loyal readership of the people here. Thank you! Also, my last blog entry dealing with animals on planes really took off. The Texas Bar informed
You’re Not Going to Believe This, but I Say Appeal This One to the Supremes before, after, or In Lieu of an En Banc Hearing
First off, I hope that everybody who celebrated Good Friday and Easter had a happy one. Today’s case, Gentry v. East-West Partners Club Management Company, Inc. is a published decision from the Fourth Circuit, which came down on March 4, 2016. I don’t believe in all my blog entries that I have ever taken the