Skip to main content

Hamilton v. Illinois Central Railroad

S.D. Miss.August 9, 1995No. 3:94-cv-00731Cited 5 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Barbour
Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute
440 Civil rights other
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
summary judgment

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

DiscriminationFailure to Accommodate

Outcome

The court granted the defendant railroad's motion for summary judgment, dismissing the plaintiff's Rehabilitation Act discrimination claim with prejudice because the employer did not receive federal financial assistance, which is a jurisdictional prerequisite for such claims.

What This Ruling Means

**Hamilton v. Illinois Central Railroad (1995)** **What Happened:** A worker named Hamilton sued Illinois Central Railroad Company, claiming the railroad discriminated against him and failed to accommodate his disability. Hamilton brought his case under the Rehabilitation Act, a federal law that protects disabled workers from discrimination. **What the Court Decided:** The court ruled completely in favor of the railroad and dismissed Hamilton's case. The judge found that the Rehabilitation Act didn't apply to this situation because Illinois Central Railroad didn't receive federal financial assistance. Under the Rehabilitation Act, employers are only required to follow anti-discrimination rules if they get federal funding. Since the railroad was apparently a private company operating without federal money, the law didn't cover Hamilton's workplace. **Why This Matters for Workers:** This case highlights an important limitation in disability rights protection. The Rehabilitation Act only protects workers at organizations that receive federal funding - like government agencies, schools, or contractors with federal contracts. Private companies that don't get federal money aren't covered by this law. However, workers at such companies may still have protection under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which covers most private employers regardless of federal funding.

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.