The U.S. Supreme Court ruled last year that a plaintiff whose myopia is remediated by corrective lenses is not “disabled” within the meaning of the Americans with Disabilities Act, but that doesn’t mean that an amendment to a similar claim is an exercise in futility, a federal magistrate judge has ruled.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Jacob P. Hart has given a class of bespectacled plaintiffs the chance to refine their employment discrimination claim to conform to pleading requirements under the provision of the act that forbids discrimination against individuals who are “regarded as” disabled.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
