Skip to main content
Claim Type

Disability Discrimination Cases

256 employment law court rulings from public federal records (19892026)

256
Total Rulings
9%
Plaintiff Win Rate
$820,377
Avg Damages (11 cases)
C.D. Cal.
Top Court

About Disability Discrimination Claims

Disability discrimination claims involve adverse employment actions based on an employee's physical or mental disability. The ADA and state disability laws prohibit discrimination against qualified individuals and require reasonable accommodations. These cases examine whether the employee can perform essential job functions with or without accommodation.

Case Outcomes

Defendant Win
77 (30%)
Dismissed
68 (27%)
Mixed Result
34 (13%)
Settlement
33 (13%)
Plaintiff Win
23 (9%)
Remanded
21 (8%)

Related Laws

Court Rulings (256)

Paguada
S.D.N.Y.Mar 3, 2022New York
Dismissed
Woodson
S.D.N.Y.Feb 28, 2022New York
Settlement
Petras
D. Nev.Feb 22, 2022Nevada
Mixed Result
Duncan
S.D.N.Y.Feb 14, 2022New York
Dismissed
Reina Isabel Barahona v. Marriott International, Inc.
C.D. Cal.Feb 7, 2022California
Remanded
Tavarez-Vargas
S.D.N.Y.Feb 3, 2022New York
Settlement
Gary Scherer v. Chukrala Isak
C.D. Cal.Feb 1, 2022California
Dismissed
Stuewe
D. Kan.Feb 1, 2022Kansas
Mixed Result
Adams
S.D. Fla.Jan 31, 2022Florida
Plaintiff Win
Estevez
S.D.N.Y.Dec 29, 2021New York
Settlement
Monegro
S.D.N.Y.Nov 18, 2021New York
Settlement
Quezada
S.D.N.Y.Nov 18, 2021New York
Settlement
BELL v. O'REILLY AUTO ENTERPRISES LLC
D. Me.Nov 5, 2021Maine
Mixed Result
Adam Veinotte v. Milford DCH, Inc. d/b/a DCH Toyota of Milford
D.N.H.Oct 25, 2021New Hampshire
Defendant Win
Woods
D.S.C.Sep 17, 2021Texas
Dismissed
Larry Dunn v. 5850 Washington, LLC
C.D. Cal.Sep 14, 2021Georgia
Defendant Win
Omar Luna v. Image Fuel, Inc.
C.D. Cal.Aug 31, 2021California
Defendant Win
Moskowitz
E.D.N.Y.Aug 31, 2021New York
Dismissed
Vasquez
S.D.N.Y.Aug 27, 2021New York
Settlement
SIMON
W.D. Pa.Aug 23, 2021Pennsylvania
Plaintiff Win
Quezada
S.D.N.Y.Aug 18, 2021New York
Settlement
Parker
D. Nev.Aug 17, 2021Nevada
Dismissed
Trujillo
E.D. Cal.Aug 9, 2021California
Dismissed
Jaquez
S.D.N.Y.Jul 30, 2021New York
Settlement
Monts
Conn. App. Ct.Jul 20, 2021

The plaintiff sought to recover damages from the defendant for, inter alia, disability discrimination pursuant to the Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act (§ 46a-51 et seq.) and for interference with the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. § 2601 et seq.) following the termination of her employment. The plaintiff was first hired by the defendant in 1995 but her position was eliminated and she was termi- nated in June, 2015. The plaintiff was rehired for a new position in August, 2015, and was subject to a probationary period for her first 120 days at work. In September, 2015, the plaintiff injured her left knee and lower back while at work. The plaintiff was placed on modified work duty but was eventually placed on an indefinite leave of absence and remained on leave until October, 2015. She missed additional work in November, 2015, after she experienced a flare-up of her knee injury. All of the time that she missed from work was considered workers' compensation leave by the defendant. The plaintiff received two negative performance evaluations in January and February, 2016, based solely on her performance while she was at work. The plaintiff was terminated for her poor job performance in March, 2016. During the trial on the plaintiff's complaint, the trial court declined to instruct the jury on the plaintiff's FMLA interference claim, concluding that there was no evidence to support the claim that the plaintiff made an FMLA request to the defendant. On the plaintiff's remaining claims, the jury returned a verdict for the defendant and the court rendered judgment in accordance with the verdict, from which the plaintiff appealed to this court. Held: 1. The trial court properly declined to charge the jury with regard to the plaintiff's claim of interference with the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993: the plaintiff failed to satisfy the preliminary requirement for the court to consider her interference claim, namely, that she made an initial showing

Defendant Win
Gabriel Dorsey v. Pasadena Commercial Development Company, LLC
C.D. Cal.Jul 14, 2021California
Remanded
WOMACK
W.D. Pa.Jul 9, 2021Pennsylvania
Dismissed
Jackson v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.
D. Minn.Jun 28, 2021Minnesota
Mixed Result
Antolini
S.D.N.Y.Jun 19, 2021New York
Dismissed
Mlsna, Mark v. Union Pacific Railroad
W.D. Wis.Jun 16, 2021Wisconsin
Remanded
EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION v. DEFENDER ASSOCIATION OF PHILADELPHIA
E.D. Pa.Jun 11, 2021Pennsylvania
Mixed Result
Reese
D. Kan.Jun 8, 2021Kansas
Dismissed
Fairchild
S.D. Cal.Jun 8, 2021California
Dismissed
Poschmann
M.D. Fla.May 10, 2021Florida
Dismissed
Strojnik
S.D. Cal.Apr 13, 2021California
Defendant Win$21,995 at issue
Angeles
S.D.N.Y.Apr 1, 2021California
Dismissed
Paguada
S.D.N.Y.Mar 26, 2021New York
Settlement
McKinney v. Sheriffs Office Rapides Parish
W.D. La.Mar 19, 2021Louisiana
Mixed Result
Quezada
S.D.N.Y.Mar 19, 2021New York
Settlement
Parness
S.D.N.Y.Mar 4, 2021New York
Remanded
Thorne
S.D.N.Y.Mar 3, 2021New York
Settlement
Buchanan
E.D.N.Y.Feb 24, 2021New York
Defendant Win
Langer
S.D. Cal.Jan 26, 2021California
Dismissed
Deleston
S.D.N.Y.Jan 12, 2021New York
Settlement
Orlando Garcia v. B R Grigsby Associates, LLC
C.D. Cal.Dec 16, 2020California
Remanded
Anthony Bouyer v. Sutter Point Plaza, LLC
C.D. Cal.Nov 19, 2020California
Dismissed
Laufer
D. Md.Nov 19, 2020Maryland
Defendant Win
West
S.D.N.Y.Nov 17, 2020New York
Settlement
Ebed
S.D.N.Y.Nov 6, 2020New York
Dismissed
(CONSENT)Johnson
E.D. Cal.Oct 22, 2020California
Settlement

Showing 101150 of 256 rulings · Page 3 of 6

Think you may have a disability discrimination claim?

Check which employment laws may protect you — free, private, and no sign-up required.

Data sourced from public federal court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes extracted using AI analysis. This information is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The classification of claim types is based on automated analysis and may not reflect the full scope of each case.