Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Disability Final - Coggle Diagram

- - - - Has a qualifying disability
      - Can perform essential job functions with or without accommodations
    - - 15 or more employees
      - Engaged in industry affecting commerce
  - - - Employer judgement
      - Listed in job description
      - Physical requirements
      - Position exists to perform that job function
      - Limited number of employees are available to perform the function
    - - Employers must provide specific evidence to justify qualification standards that screen out disabled individuals
      - Generalized safety concerns are insufficient to support blanket exclusion policies
  - - - Employers may justify their use of qualification standards that screen out, or deny a job or benefit to, an individual with a disability
        
        Standards must be “job-related and consistent with business necessity"
        
        Performance cannot be accomplished by reasonable accommodation
  - - - Requests that overturn seniority are generally unreasonable
      - If a “reassignment accommodation” would violate the rules of a bona fide seniority system, summary judgment typically is warranted for by the employer
  - - - Required to ensure opportunity in the job application process
      - Enable the qualified employee with a disability to perform essential job functions
      - Enables the qualified employee with a disability to enjoy equal benefits and privileges of employment
    - - Chevron USA, Inc. v. Echazabal
  - - - Direct Threat Elements (Chevron)
        
        Decisions must be based off objective, scientific evidence
        
        Individualized and objective assessment required
        
        Reasonable accommodations that could mitigate the risk must be considered
        
        Employers cannot rely on unfounded fears or stereotypes
        
        Threat to self and threat to others
      - Significant risk of substantial harm to the health or safety of the individual or others that cannot be eliminated or reduced by reasonable accommodation
      - Pontinen v. U.S. Steel Corp.
        Rescinded job offer because of his seizures and the equipment he would have to work with
  - - - An employer’s request for a medical examination is job-related and consistent with business necessity when:
        
        (1) the employee requests an accommodation
        
        (2) the employee’s ability to perform the essential functions of the job is impaired
        
        (3) the employee poses a direct threat to himself or others
      - Kroll v. White Lake Ambulance Authority
        Being required to discuss personal issues with a therapist is considered a medical examination
      - Requirements for ordering a medical examination
        
        Job-related and consistent with business necessity
        
        Legitimate business reasons exist for examining employee
        
        No broader or more intrusive than necessary
        
        Individualized exam based on current medical knowledge
      - Parker v. Crete Carrier Corp.
        Sleep studies are medical examinations
  - - - Enjoining the respondent from continuing to engage in the unlawful employment action
      - Order reinstatement or hiring
      - As an adjunct to reinstatement or hiring, back pay or other equitable relief
      - Front pay to provide an income for the claimant for a certain period of time
      - Attorney's fees
- - - - Claimant was excluded from participation in or denied the benefits of a public entity’s services, programs, or activities, or was otherwise discriminated against
      - Such exclusion, denial of benefits, or discrimination was by the reason of the claimant’s disability
      - Claimant is a QIWD
  - - - Prisons are considered public entities under Title II
      - In a prisoner complaint against high-level government official for medical claim, prisoner must prove the official’s direct involvement
    - - Exposing detainees to extreme temperatures without adequate protection can constitute a violation of their Fourteenth Amendment rights (Cadena v. El Paso)
        
        Jail officials cannot claim qualified immunity when they disregard clear signs of serious medical needs resulting from such conditions
      - Jail officials cannot claim qualified immunity when they disregard clear signs of medical needs resulting from such conditions (Cadena v. El Paso)
      - To maintain a claim against high-level government official in a prisoner’s civil rights complaint concerning medical care, complainant must demonstrate personal involvement of the high-level government official in the alleged constitutional violation (Andrews v. Rauner)
      - Prison officials have an affirmative duty to evaluate the needs of disabled inmates and provide reasonable accommodations, even without a specific request from the inmate (Pierce v. District of Columbia)
  - - - Sidewalks are a “service, program, or activity” under Title II
      - Essential gateways to public services and transportation
      - Private right of action to enforce Title I of the ADA with respect to newly built and altered public sidewalks
      - Existing sidewalks are different
      - Frame v. City of Arlington
    - - Street resurfacing constitutes an “alteration” under the ADA, requiring the installation of curb ramps
      - Cities must gradually make streets more accessible to individuals with mobility impairments as part of regular street maintenance programs
  - - - Title II regulations provide that public entities must administer services, programs, or activities in the most integrated setting appropriate to the needs of QIWD’s
      - Olmstead v. L.C. ex rel. Zimring
        Institutionalization Isolation of PWD’s
        
        Balance between “integration mandate” and “fundamental alteration” limit on reasonable accommodation
        
        Institutional placement of persons who can handle and benefit from community settings perpetuates unwarranted assumptions that persons so isolated are incapable or unworthy of participating in community life
        
        Factors for community based care (reasonable modification regulation)
  - - - The Medicaid Act’s “comparability” provision requires that medical assistance made available to any categorically needy individual shall not be less in amount, duration, or scope than assistance made available to any other such individual (Davis v. Shah)
      - States have an ongoing obligation to provide mental health services in the least restrictive environment appropriate to the individual’s needs and to develop robust community based service programs (United States v. Mississippi / Applied Olmstead)
      - The ADA prohibits discrimination against IWD’s in the provision of public services (Davis v. Shah)
    - - Safe conditions and freedom from bodily restraint are protected rights under due process (Youngberg v. Romeo)
      - States may impose different burdens of proof for the involuntary commitment of mentally ill versus cognitively impaired persons under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause (Heller v. Doe)