By: Loyd Willaford & Brittany Torrence
In Moore v. Mancuso, the U. S. District Court of Louisiana dismissed a Calcasieu Parish Sheriff’s Office (CPSO) deputy’s claim that the CPSO did not accommodate his disability.
Archives for August 2017
August 31, 2017 By
Former Louisiana Deputy’s ADA Claims Dismissed Because He Was Not Present At Work To Determine Whether His Disability Would Be Accommodated
August 31, 2017 By
District Court Rules that Diabetic Illinois State Trooper No Longer Able to Perform “Essential Functions of the Job”
By: Loyd Willaford and Sarah Burke
In Kirincich v. Ill. State Police, a former Illinois state trooper argued she was wrongfully terminated after she suffered a diabetic episode on duty and crashed her patrol car. A federal district court in Illinois disagreed, finding that the trooper could no longer perform the essential functions of her job and the department had fulfilled its duty to accommodate her disability.
August 17, 2017 By
King County Corrections Officer Who “Looks Good For Her Age” May Pursue Her Sexual Harassment Claim
By: Loyd Willaford and Sarah Burke
In Coleman-Askew v. King County, a King County female corrections officer alleged she was sexually harassed after her supervisor, Captain Hardy, followed her to the gym and made comments about how she “looked good for her age.” The corrections officer sued, alleging these comments caused her to request a transfer to a different department and resulted in a loss of workplace benefits. The department alleged these comments were not sexual in nature and therefore did not constitute sexual harassment. The United States District Court in Western Washington agreed with the officer and found that she could pursue her claims against the department. The District Court did dismiss some of the officer’s claims, specifically those against Captain Hardy’s supervisor.
August 7, 2017 By
Second Circuit Finds NYPD Officer Was Not Punished for Taking Military Leave
By: Loyd Willaford and Sarah Burke
In Caines v. City of New York, a former NYPD police officer and National Guard reservist alleged the department had illegally discriminated against him after he took military leave. The Second Circuit found that because the officer never experienced any negative actions due to his military status he could not successfully pursue his claim.
