Skip to main content

Fleming v. Yuma Regional Medical Center

9th CircuitNovember 19, 2009No. 07-16427Cited 39 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Citation
587 F.3d 938, 22 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 1033, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 25406, 2009 WL 3856926
Judge(s)
Gould, Bybee, Tymkovich
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal
State
Arizona

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

DiscriminationBreach of Contract

Outcome

The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's summary judgment, holding that the Rehabilitation Act §504 covers independent contractors in employment discrimination claims, not just employees. Dr. Fleming, an anesthesiologist with sickle cell anemia, may proceed with his disability discrimination claim against Yuma Regional Medical Center.

What This Ruling Means

**Fleming v. Yuma Regional Medical Center: Court Sides with Hospital in Disability Discrimination Case** This case involved a worker at Yuma Regional Medical Center who claimed the hospital discriminated against them because of a medical condition. The employee also alleged the hospital retaliated against them for complaining about discrimination and failed to provide reasonable accommodations for their disability. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the hospital. The court found there wasn't enough evidence to prove the hospital discriminated against the employee based on their medical condition or retaliated against them for filing complaints. The court granted summary judgment, meaning it decided the case without a trial because the evidence was insufficient to support the worker's claims. **What This Means for Workers:** This ruling highlights how challenging it can be to win disability discrimination cases. Workers must provide solid evidence showing their employer treated them unfairly specifically because of their medical condition. Simply having a disability and experiencing workplace problems isn't enough – you need clear proof connecting your medical condition to the negative treatment. Workers facing similar situations should document incidents carefully and consider seeking legal advice early to understand whether they have sufficient evidence to support their claims.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.