Cases

Plaintiff sued his public entity employer for disability discrimination and failure to participate in the interactive process after the employer determined that plaintiff could not perform the essential functions of his job in light of doctor-imposed restrictions on his movement.

The Court of Appeal affirmed a grant of summary judgment for the employer.  On the disability discrimination claim, it agreed that plaintiff’s application for CalPERS disability retirement judicially estopped him from claiming he could perform the essential functions of his job, and that plaintiff’s evidentiary challenges were either without merit or forfeited.  On the interactive process claim, the Court of Appeal found that plaintiff failed to meet his burden of identifying a reasonable accommodation that was available at the time, and that the employer could have offered.

Court of Appeal Opinion – View Document