Seyfarth Synopsis: The Tenth Circuit further clarifies The Rehabilitation Act while making it even harder to get rid of failure to accommodate claims at the summary judgment stage; FEHA and ADA implications may follow.
On June 16th, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit brought down a case that further defined The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and made it even harder to get rid of failure to accommodate claims at the summary judgement stage.
The Rehabilitation Act, In Sum
On its face, The Rehabilitation Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in programs run by federal agencies, those receiving federal financial assistance, and those in federal employment (or in the employment of federal contractors). The Act requires federal employers to "meet the needs of disabled workers and . . . broaden their employment opportunities." Woodman v. Runyon, 132 F.3d 1330, 1337–38 (10th Cir. 1997).
In other words, the Act is the federal-employer counterpart to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and state equivalents such as the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). In fact, both the ADA and the FEHA were modeled in part after the Rehabilitation Act. (See The Rutter Guide). "As a result, courts interpreting the FEHA have looked to decisions under both the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act absent controlling state law." (Id.) It's safe to say any one of these acts has the potential to influence understandings of the remaining two.
Like the...
The lawsuit claims the companies exceeded the $4 million limit for second-draw loans available to a single corporate group. A private firm, Blockquote Inc., originally filed the suit under the Fal...