Employment Law Chicago Blog

On February 20, 2020, the 7th Circuit affirmed an order of summary judgment in favor of a defendant employer in a disability discrimination lawsuit under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA").  Stelter v. Wisconsin Physicians Service Insurance Corporation, No. 18-3689 (7th Cir. Feb. 20, 2020).  The plaintiff alleged that she was disabled under the ADA with back pain aggravated by a work injury.  She claimed that the defendant failed to accommodate her disability and terminated her employment because of her disability in violation of the ADA.  The record contained evidence, however, that the defendant terminated her on account of legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons.

On February 13, 2020, the 7th Circuit issued an opinion in which it explain the respective responsibilities of both employers and employees under the Family and Medical Leave Act ("FMLA").  Lutes v. United Trailers, Inc., et al., No. 19-1579 (7th Cir. Feb. 13, 2020).  The plaintiff sued under the FMLA, alleging that the defendant failed to properly notify him of his FMLA rights, and terminated his employment in retaliation for attempting to exercise his FMLA rights.  The district court granted summary judgment for the defendant.  The 7th Circuit affirmed the district court's summary judgment as to the FMLA retaliation claim, but vacated the district court's judgment on the FMLA interference claim.

On February 7, 2020, the 7th Circuit affirmed the district court's order of summary judgment in favor of the employer-defendant in a Title VII retaliation lawsuit in which the plaintiff alleged retaliation for complaining about discrimination in the workplace.  Robertson v. State of Wisconsin Department of Health Services, et al., No. 19-1179 (7th Cir. Feb. 7, 2020).  The plaintiff's retaliation claim failed due to lack of evidence of a causal connection between her protected activity--reporting discrimination--and the defendant's decision to not promote her, and because she did not establish that she suffered an adverse job action.

On February 6, 2020, the Illinois Appellate Court, First District, affirmed the trial court's order granting summary judgment in favor of the defendant-employer in a disability discrimination lawsuit filed by the Plaintiff, a manager of a federal government youth-wellness facility, under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") and the Illinois Human Rights Act ("IHRA").  Fox v. Adams and Associates, et al., 2020 IL App (1st) 182470 (February 6, 2020).  The Plaintiff was involved in an automobile accident that caused injuries requiring prolonged leaves of absence.  The trial court found: (1) that the Plaintiff was not a qualified individual with a disability; (2) that there was no genuine issue of material fact that she could not perform the essential functions of her job due to her disability; and (3) the employer terminated her employment due to her medical inability to work.  On appeal, the Plaintiff argued that she was a qualified individual with a disability because her request for a multi-month leave of absence was not unreasonable, and that she did not request an indefinite amount of time for her leave of absence.

On January 24, 2020, the 7th Circuit affirmed an order of summary judgment in favor of a defendant-employer in a lawsuit filed under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA").  Youngman v. Peoria County, No. 18-2544 (7th Cir. Jan. 24, 2020).  The plaintiff was placed on medical leave after he informed his supervisor that he could no longer work shifts in the control room.  When changes in job rotations had resulted in his temporary assignment to the control room, he experienced various symptoms.  He requested that he not be assigned to the control room in the future as a reasonable accommodation, but was informed that was not possible.  He was instructed that he could return to work if and when his condition improved.  After his leave time expired, his position was filled, and he filed a lawsuit under the ADA, alleging that the defendant had refused to accommodate his disability and forced him out of his position.  The district court granted summary judgment for the defendant on the ground that the plaintiff was responsible for the breakdown of the interactive process required by the ADA when an employee requests an accommodation.  The 7th Circuit affirmed, but on a different ground.

On January 3, 2020, the 7th Circuit affirmed the district court's order granting a defendant-employer's motion for summary judgment in a Title VII race discrimination failure-to-promote lawsuit.  Barnes v. Board of Trustees Of The University of Illinois, et al., No. 19-1781 (7th Cir. Jan. 3, 2020).  The plaintiff filed a federal lawsuit under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ("Title VII") after an administrator of the defendant-employer promoted a white applicant instead of the plaintiff, who is African-American.  The 7th Circuit affirmed the district court's order of summary judgment because the plaintiff did not present evidence that the administrator's stated reason for selecting the white applicant was pretext for unlawful racial discrimination.