Employment Law Reporter Spring 2022 | Rivkin Radler LLP - JDSupra - JD Supra
The U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York has granted the defendant’s
motion in an employment discrimination lawsuit brought under the federal Rehabilitation Act,
finding that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that he was disabled or considered to be disabled
As the court explained, the plaintiff was a veteran of the U.S. Army who served in Iraq. In
the course of his service, the plaintiff sustained skull fractures and injuries to his back resulting in
ongoing symptoms including migraines, hearing loss and memory issues. The plaintiff also was
diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (“PTSD”) and a traumatic brain injury (a “TBI”).
During his service in the army, the plaintiff attended military police training school. He was
honorably discharged and joined the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (“VA”) as a police officer
on October 15, 2006. The plaintiff initially was assigned to the VA facility in Syracuse, New York.
Center (“CVAMC”) in Canandaigua, New York. In May 2015, the plaintiff was reassigned to a
In April 2017, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the Secretary of the VA, alleging that
In its decision, the court explained that the plaintiff asserted that his suit was “authorized
and instituted pursuant to Section 107(a) of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (‘ADA’), 42
U.S.C. § 12117(a), which incorporates by reference Section 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 (‘Title VII’), 42 U.S.C. § 1981, and pursuant to the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended 29 U.S.C. § 706, 791 et seq.” The court pointed out, however, that in the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Second Circuit, “Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act provides the exclusive route
by which federal employees may raise claims of employment discrimination on the basis of
Thus, the court evaluated the plaintiff’s disability claims pursuant to the Rehabilitation Act.
As the court noted, Section 794(a) of the Rehabilitation Act provides that “[n]o otherwise
qualified individual with a disability in the United States . . . shall, solely by reason of her or his
disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to
discrimination . . . under any program or activity conducted by any Executive agency. . . .”
The court observed that claims of intentional discrimination pressed under the
To survive summary judgment on a claim related to an adverse employment action, a
plaintiff must first establish a prima facie claim of discrimination. Once a plaintiff
establishes such a case, a presumption arises that more likely than not the adverse conduct
was based on the consideration of impermissible factors and the burden then shifts to
treatment. If the employer offers such a legitimate reason, the burden shifts back to the
plaintiff to prove that the employer’s reason was in fact pretext for discrimination.
The court added that, to make out a prima facie claim of employment discrimination in
• The plaintiff was otherwise qualified to perform the essential functions of the plaintiff’s
• The plaintiff suffered an adverse employment action because of the plaintiff’s disability.
Discrimination on the basis of disability may take the form of “disparate treatment,
disparate impact, or failure to make a reasonable accommodation,” the court said.
According to the court, the defendant conceded that it was subject to the Rehabilitation
Act; that the plaintiff was qualified to perform the essential functions of his position as a police
officer; and that the plaintiff’s reassignment as an SSA was an adverse employment action.
The court then agreed with the defendant’s argument that the plaintiff was not disabled or
perceived to be disabled within the meaning of the Rehabilitation Act and that, as a result, the
plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence to set forth a prima facie case of discrimination
As the court explained, the Rehabilitation Act defines the term “individual with a disability”
by cross reference to the ADA. The ADA defines a disability as “‘(A) a physical or mental
source: https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/employment-law-reporter-spring-2022-7710203/
Your content is great. However, if any of the content contained herein violates any rights of yours, including those of copyright, please contact us immediately by e-mail at media[@]kissrpr.com.