The IDHR told her 'no further action' was required – but the court wasn't so sure
A confusing state agency process nearly killed a disability discrimination claim – and a federal appeals court just said that matters for every employer.
On April 28, 2026, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the dismissal of an ADA lawsuit brought by Kimberly Ballard, a former energy efficiency advisor at Ameren Illinois Company, sending the case back to the district court for further consideration. The ruling highlights a procedural gap in the charge-filing process that HR professionals should understand, especially when dealing with employees who pursue discrimination claims through state agencies.
Ballard began working for Ameren in 2013. In February 2015, she fell and injured her wrist at a work-related conference, later undergoing surgeries and requesting accommodations. According to her complaint, Ameren allegedly responded by issuing negative performance reviews, passing her over for promotion, and ultimately terminating her on February 26, 2018. She has alleged that these actions were taken because of her physical disability.
After her termination, Ballard turned to the Illinois Department of Human Rights. On August 23, 2018, she submitted a Complainant Information Sheet – the only way the IDHR allows individuals to initiate the charge process. That form named Ameren, described her allegations, and was filed 178 days after her termination, well within the ADA's 300-day...
Image: Facebook/SAPS The IDAC has rubbished rumours that it has a J50 warrant of arrest for KZN provincial police commissioner Lieutenant-General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi as “false”. This comes after re...