Courts and the Americans with Disabilities Act

This is a discussion activity about a case and related article.

• The discussion article is “Pregnant Memphis Utility Attorney’s Disabilities Bias Win Upheld,”  (Links to an external site.)by Patrick Dorrian.
• The discussion case is Mosby-Meachem v. Memphis Light, Gas & Water Div., 2018 BL 57212, 6th Cir., No. 17-5483 (Links to an external site.).

Read the article and case, and respond to each of the following questions:

1. The Court assumes that the plaintiff was disabled within the meaning of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA.) In light of our course reading in this class, what facts in the decision support that assumption?
2. What accommodation did the plaintiff seek in this case?
3. Why was her job description not determinative with respect to the essential functions of the plaintiff’s job?
4. Did the employer satisfy its obligation to engage in an ADA interactive process? If not, how it did fall short?
5. What factors lead the Court to conclude that working from home was a reasonable accommodation in this case?
6. Do you agree or disagree with the Court’s ruling on that issue? Explain your views in light of our course reading in this class.
7. Are there some things that the employer could have done differently that would have avoided this lawsuit or changed its outcome? What lessons should it learn from this case? Explain your views in light of our course reading in this class.
8. Describe the aspects of the case that you find most interesting or surprising.