Plaintiff was employed by Defendant from 2008 until her employment was terminated in 2015. Alleging Defendant discriminated against her based on her disability and retaliated against her for seeking an accommodation for that disability, Plaintiff initiated litigation alleging Defendant had violated provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. § 12101, et seq., the New York State Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law §296, and 42 U.S.C. §1983.
Plaintiff claimed the Defendant failed to
reasonably accommodate her request not to be assigned archiving tasks provided the Defendant with medical documentation describing her physical limitations.*
Federal District Court granted Defendant's motion for summary judgment on her reasonable accommodation and retaliation claims. Plaintiff appealed the federal district court's ruling.
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals, finding that "archiving was not an essential function" of Plaintiff's position, opined:
[1] Viewing the evidence most favorably to Plaintiff, a rational jury could find Defendants failed to provide a reasonable workplace accommodation for her disability; and
[2] Disputed "issues of material fact" precluded the federal district court's granting summary judgment to Defendant with respect to Plaintiff's retaliation claim."
Addressing Plaintiff's §1983 claim, the Second Circuit said that because Plaintiff had not presented any arguments on appeal challenging the federal district court’s decision with respect to her §1983 claim, it deemed that Plaintiff had abandoned that claim.
Vacating the federal district court’s decision with respect to the Plaintiff's reasonable accommodation and retaliation allegations, the Circuit Court, Judge Sullivan concurring in part and dissenting in part in a second opinion, remanded the matter to the district court for "further proceedings consistent with this opinion."
* Plaintiff also contended that Defendants retaliated against her for making the accommodation request by forcing her to go on medical leave, which ultimately led to her termination.
Click HERE to access the Appellate Division's decision posted on the Internet.