1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Lawyer alleges BigLaw firm fired her 11 days…

Disability Law

Lawyer alleges BigLaw firm fired her 11 days after she disclosed epilepsy diagnosis, violating disability law

By Debra Cassens Weiss

April 10, 2025, 9:00 am CDT

A former lawyer at Ballard Spahr has filed a lawsuit alleging that she was fired for taking medical leave after suffering gastrointestinal problems and a seizure.

Kimberly Steefel, a former of counsel for Ballard Spahr, filed the April 8 suit in the U.S. District for the Southern District of New York, Law360 reports in a story noted by Above the Law.

Steefel learned that she was being fired in October 2022 on the day that she returned to the law firm’s New York office from medical leave, according to her suit. Only 11 days before she had disclosed her epilepsy diagnosis and her medical provider’s recommendation for an accommodation in the form of a flexible work schedule, the suit says.

Steefel suffered from gastrointestinal problems and what she thought was her first seizure before beginning the medical leave. She later sought “16 reasonable accommodations for her epilepsy,” the suit says.

The accommodations stemmed from the effect of epilepsy on stamina and concentration and the need to “avoid environments pervaded by anxiety and hostility,” which can lower the seizure threshold, according to the suit.

There was no attempt to discuss accommodations, the suit says. Steefel was initially told that her employment would end no later than mid-January 2023, but the date was later pushed back to mid-April 2023.

Before she learned of her firing, Steefel had “received nothing but praise and positive feedback” for her work, the suit says.

Her suit alleges discrimination, retaliation, hostile treatment and wrongful termination on the basis of Steefel’s disabilities and gender in violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and state and local anti-discrimination laws.

The suit alleges that the firm has a history of discriminating against disabled people, pointing to Ballard Spahr lawyer job ads with “nonsensical physical requirements” that include the ability to “stand, walk, bend and stoop,” to sit for long periods of time, and to “lift up to 40 pounds.”

Steefel also alleges that her practice group, the employee benefits and executive compensation group, created a hostile work environment on the basis of sex.

The group had a “systematic practice” of “replacing the junior- or mid-level female attorneys with other female attorneys at the same or lower level, thus keeping the cycle of maintaining females at lower-level positions only, and at the same time, hiring into and promoting to more senior-level positions only males,” the suit says.

Ballard Spahr provided this statement to the ABA Journal: “The firm disputes the allegations contained in Ms. Steefel’s complaint, and in particular, that she was terminated due to an alleged disability or her gender. The firm will defend the case vigorously.”

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Federal appeals judge, 97, loses bid to unseal…

Judiciary

Federal appeals judge, 97, loses bid to unseal documents about her suspension

By Debra Cassens Weiss

February 4, 2025, 9:30 am CST

Federal law does not permit a 97-year-old federal appeals judge to unseal documents about her suspension absent consent of the chief judge of her circuit, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled Monday.

Judge Pauline Newman of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit wanted to unseal the documents in an appeal of a federal judge’s July ruling dismissing her challenge to the disability law governing her case, Law360 reports.

Newman was suspended in September 2023 for refusing to participate in medical evaluations to determine her mental fitness.

Newman had told the D.C. Circuit that the only confidential information in the documents concern her medical history, Law360 reported. The Federal Circuit countered that the documents were of “questionable relevance” and will soon be released with redactions.

Newman was investigated after evidence was said to show “troubling signs” of her cognitive decline. Her expert, an editor of the principal neurosurgery textbook, said Newman had an “extraordinarily high level of cognitive ability” and appears to be a “super-ager.”

The D.C. Circuit said the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act generally does not permit disclosure of records related to investigations unless written consent is obtained from the judge under investigation and the chief judge of the relevant circuit.

See also:

97-year-old federal appeals judge should be suspended another year for exam refusal, panel says

Federal appeals judge, 97, who refused to cooperate in fitness probe loses challenge to disability law

Investigations of federal judges are rare and should happen more, former clerk says

Federal appeals judge, 96, fails to overturn suspension order for refusing to cooperate in fitness probe

Speaking at ABA meeting, federal appeals judge, 96, doesn’t address her suspension but mentions opinion pace

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Penn Law is quicker to discipline whites…

Law Professors

Penn Law is quicker to discipline whites than minorities, controversial prof alleges in lawsuit

By Debra Cassens Weiss

January 21, 2025, 12:29 pm CST

The University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School is facing a lawsuit alleging that the school violated First Amendment principles and anti-discrimination laws when it disciplined a professor for her controversial remarks.

Tenured law professor Amy Wax filed the Jan. 16 suit in federal court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, report Reuters, Law.com and Law360.

The law school had suspended Wax with half pay and full benefits for the 2025-2026 school year because of alleged “discriminatory and disparaging statements.” She also lost her named chair position and summer pay “in perpetuity.”

Wax’s alleged controversial comments included assertions that Black law students rarely graduate in the top half of their class and warnings about dominance by the “Asian elite” and the loss of bourgeois culture.

Wax’s suit says the school’s disciplinary proceedings against her are “grossly deficient” and “kangaroo-court-like.”

The school’s speech policy “discriminates based not only on the content of speech but also the racial identity of the speaker,” the suit says.

Professors like herself who are white or Jewish are far more likely to be disciplined for their speech than speakers who are racial minorities, the suit claims.

In addition, the suit says, “some races may not be criticized while other racial or ethnic groups can be—and routinely are—subjected to virulently racist speech without consequence.”

As an illustration, the suit says, the school declined to initiate disciplinary proceedings against a male lecturer who created a cartoon labeled “the Anti-Semite” that depicted three Jewish people drinking glasses of blood labeled “Gaza.” The school did criticize the lecturer, however.

The speech policy also punishes speech based on harm, which means that the school punishes speech based on disapproval and emotional reaction to statements, the suit says. That violates the school’s contractual promise to abide by First Amendment principles, according to the suit.

The suit asks the court to ban discipline against Wax and future enforcement of the speech policy, to declare that the policy violates anti-discrimination laws and the First Amendment, and to award damages.

The suit alleges breach of contract, violation of anti-discrimination laws, and false light invasion of privacy for alleged “cherry-picked” depictions of Wax’s speech that cast her as a “virulent racist.” The suit also reserves the right to sue for violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act for the school’s alleged refusal to delay disciplinary proceedings during her cancer treatments.

The university declined to comment when contacted by Law.com, Reuters and Law360.

The case is Wax v. University of Pennsylvania. Wax is represented by Holtzman Vogel.

Write a letter to the editor, share a story tip or update, or report an error.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Law grads with past substance-use disorders…

Disability Law

Law grads with past substance-use disorders suffered disability bias in quest for license, DOJ says

By Debra Cassens Weiss

January 6, 2025, 3:15 pm CST

Would-be Tennessee lawyers encountered unlawful disability discrimination when they were required to submit to “burdensome examinations” and conditions triggered by their past diagnosis or treatment for a substance-use disorder or a mental health disorder, the U.S. Department of Justice has concluded.

The Tennessee Board of Law Examiners and the Tennessee Lawyers Assistance Program violated Title II of the Americans With Disabilities Act, which protects people with from being excluded from programs of state and local governments, according to a letter of findings released Dec. 17.

The DOJ investigated after receiving complaints from two bar applicants, “D.S.” and “C.B.,” who were previously treated for substance-use disorders related to prescription drugs. Both suffered “significant economic harm,” including loss of jobs because of delays in obtaining a law license and costs incurred in complying with required evaluations by treatment facilities.

The conditions for obtaining a law license were “burdensome, intrusive and unnecessary,” the letter said.

NBC News has identified D.S. as Derek Scott, who was taking buprenorphine, a Food and Drug Administration-approved medication that his doctor prescribed, to treat the opioid-use disorder that he developed after becoming addicted to painkillers. The network chronicled Scott’s battle for a law license.

Scott, now an attorney in Clarksville, Tennessee, has been treated continuously for opioid-use disorder since 2012. He graduated from the University of Tennessee College of Law in 2019. On his bar application, Scott disclosed charges that were later dismissed, most of which happened when his addiction to painkillers was untreated.

Because Scott was taking buprenorphine, he was required to undergo a multiday assessment at an addiction-recovery facility that cost him $2,000. No drugs were found in his system other than buprenorphine. No cognitive impairment was found. The facility nonetheless recommended a six-month inpatient treatment program that would cost Scott $30,000, an amount lowered to $15,000 with credit for the $2,000 already spent because of scholarship money from the Tennessee Lawyers Assistance Program.

Scott’s treating physician “emphatically” disagreed with the need for inpatient treatment to stop a medication that was effectively treating his disability, the DOJ letter said. If he didn’t comply, Scott was told, he wouldn’t get a law license.

“Thus, D.S. was left with the choice of continuing the treatment that is successful for him in treating his [opioid-use disorder] or obtaining his license to practice law,” according to the letter of findings.

The law firm that had employed Scott as a law clerk fired him in November 2021 because of his inability to get a law license.

Scott sought a second evaluation by another facility and was granted permission. A psychiatrist there found that the drug therapy had been successful, and there were no legal, educational or occupational deficiencies. The medical report nonetheless concluded that Scott was not fit to practice law, and that abstinence treatment at a facility should be considered.

After the DOJ notified the Tennessee agencies in September 2023 that it was investigating, Scott received his law license.

The other lawyer, C.B., had completed an inpatient rehabilitation program in 2010 and graduated from law school in 2020. C.B. informed the Tennessee Board of Law Examiners that several misdemeanor arrests happened while he was abusing alcohol and Xanax, which is often used to treat anxiety disorders and anxiety caused by depression. A board interviewer concluded that C.B. had no mental or psychological disorder that would affect his ability to practice law.

C.B. was nonetheless referred to the Tennessee Lawyers Assistance Program for evaluation and was required to pay $6,000 for a psychological and drug assessment. The medical report found that C.B. was fit to practice law but recommended abstinence-based outpatient therapy for substance-use management and physical therapy for pain. He should also quit smoking and get his cholesterol checked, the report said.

The Tennessee Lawyers Assistance Program said C.B. should get outpatient treatment in a drug program four days per week. C.B. lost his job and moved from Ohio to Tennessee to attend a seven-week program. He was then allowed to obtain a law license as long as he entered a five-year monitoring contract and submitted to random drug tests.

The restrictions and conditions imposed on Scott and C.B. “were based on speculation about their disabilities that were contrary to demonstrated conduct, and as to D.S. in particular, they were based on stigma and stereotypes about his prescribed treatment,” the letter said.

Scott told NBC News that he felt validated by the findings.

“I felt like they had put up an obstacle that they knew I couldn’t overcome,” he said.

Scott works as a lawyer primarily handling criminal defense cases, according to NBC News. He continues to take his medication.

NBC News spoke with civil rights attorney David Sinkman, who handles substance-use bias cases, about the DOJ letter. He was not involved in the case.

“This is a powerful finding by the Department of Justice that applies beyond admission to practice law in Tennessee, since there are similar licensing restrictions in other states and for other professions,” Sinkman said.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Dive into our favorite long reads of 2024

Year in Review

Dive into our favorite long reads of 2024

By Lee Rawles

December 23, 2024, 9:35 am CST

The end of the year will hopefully bring you some downtime for leisure reading. We’ve curated a list of some of our favorite web and print long reads from 2024. There’s a mix of popular features and some under-the-radar stories that you may have missed. In keeping with the theme, it’s a long list.

In 1991, personal injury lawyers Zachary Bravos and Todd Smith took on the strangest medical malpractice case of their careers—a case that led them to tales of satanic cults, child abuse and cannibalism.

As anyone who pays attention to current events knows all too well, Taylor Swift has become ubiquitous. And in at least two law schools, she’s the subject of a class available to students wanting to gain practical knowledge about the law by studying her various legal entanglements and how she emerged stronger.

There are law firms in which Carrie Garber Siegrist, a senior associate in the Washington, D.C., office of Goodwin Procter, might have had to be secretive about her diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, also known as ADHD. But at Goodwin Procter, Garber Siegrist says, she feels embraced and supported.

The Kentucky Derby has long been known as “the fastest two minutes in sports,” but the 150th Run for the Roses on Saturday will take place without Muth, a horse some say may have been the fastest in the field this year.

Pete Pontzer’s story is a reminder that lawyers can have meaningful and fulfilling lives after retirement. However, as Pontzer quickly admonishes, there are some important steps to take long before leaving a full-time legal career.

Serious injuries have occurred when exuberant football fans engaged in the time-honored revelry of making goal posts a trophy of a significant or improbable win. Some of those harmed have sought to lay blame and seek compensation. In several such cases, it took referees in black robes to sort it out.

Now in its 25th year, the esteemed literary magazine’s weekly competition features a wordless single panel cartoon. Contestants submit a caption for the image. The publication’s editors choose their three favorites from the 5,000 to 10,000 entries. Online public voting—with generally more than a half million votes cast—determines the winner. There is no cash prize for winning, but the bragging rights are priceless. Wood is the contest’s most successful participant—by a lot.

An increasing number of law schools around the country are offering cannabis law courses, but some professors think that even more are needed. “We’re still playing catch-up.”

Many public service attorneys had an overwhelming feeling that massive student loan debt would travel through life with them. But many of those attorneys got relief in the past year, thanks to recent changes to the federal government’s Public Service Loan Forgiveness program.

Critics argue that “excited delirium” has no medical foundation, and that its origins are plagued with racism. The term’s role in high-profile police misconduct cases has prompted major medical organizations to repudiate its use.

There has been an explosion of AI-generated music featuring the living or resurrecting the dead. But as artists push the limits of parody, fair use, right of publicity, infringement and authorship, there is one overarching question: Is any of this stuff legal?

Immigrants coming to the U.S. face legal uncertainties along with difficult living conditions and the pain of family separations. Yet a hope that opportunities will outweigh the travails is strong with many new arrivals. That’s something lawyers who help immigrants understand well—including those who are immigrants themselves.

Each state sets its own rules for formerly incarcerated people who want to practice law. In Kansas, Mississippi and Texas, for example, no one with a felony can practice law. But even for those who live in less restrictive states, there are other hurdles to overcome.

“People are like, ‘Why did you go to law school?’ I tell them, ‘I’m setting up a joke that I’m going to tell in 14 years. I’m a planner,’” Liz Glazer says.

While progress has been made in the past 25 years, members of the Asian American and Pacific Islander communities continue to be underrepresented at the highest levels of the legal profession.

Most dog moms and cat dads accept the hard truth that they will likely outlive their beloved animals. But what happens when pets outlive their humans?

Millennials are more willing than prior generations to switch jobs to achieve a work environment that fits their needs. However, they can “run up against a wall” with billable hours.

Innocence clinics usually don’t work with clients convicted of minor offenses. They focus on more serious crimes where the stakes are much higher: people on death row or those serving life sentences for murder or sexual assault.

Netflix’s Hell Camp: Teen Nightmare, released in December 2023, sounds like a cheesy 1980s slaughter-fest horror film. Sadly, the events relayed by the documentary are far from fiction.

It isn’t often that a bipartisan group of U.S. solicitors general gather in public to discuss their unique role in the legal system and even gripe a little about the U.S. Supreme Court. But that’s what happened recently in a packed hotel ballroom before the ABA 2024 Litigation Section Annual Conference in Washington, D.C.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Death row inmate held in solitary confinement…

Criminal Justice

Death row inmate held in solitary confinement for 26 years can sue, federal appeals court rules

By Debra Cassens Weiss

September 26, 2024, 9:22 am CDT

A death row inmate with a known history of serious mental illness can sue Pennsylvania’s corrections chief for holding him in solitary confinement for 26 years, a federal appeals court ruled Friday.

The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at Philadelphia ruled 2-1 that inmate Roy L. Williams can sue for alleged violations of the Americans With Disabilities Act and the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

The Associated Press covered the Sept. 20 decision.

The prison chief did not have qualified immunity because “individuals with a known history of serious mental illness have a clearly established right not to be subjected to prolonged, indefinite solitary confinement—without penological justification—by an official who was aware of that history,” wrote Senior Judge Theodore McKee, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, citing a prior case.

Williams was in solitary confinement between 1993 and 2019, when the state corrections department changed its policy because of a legal settlement. But the department was on notice that its policy was cruel and unusual because of a 2014 report by the U.S. Department of Justice, McKee said.

The report said harsh solitary confinement for extended periods of time for prisoners with serious mental illness and intellectual disability “constitutes precisely the type of indifference to excessive risk of harm the Eighth Amendment prohibits.”

Judge Peter J. Phipps, an appointee of former President Donald Trump, dissented.

The majority “ignores this court’s precedent and misapplies foundational principles,” Phipps wrote.

Williams, who was convicted for killing a construction worker, had mental health issues since childhood, according to the opinion. He was 14 years old when he was involuntarily committed for suicidal threats and violent behavior.

Williams was represented by the Pennsylvania Institutional Law Project, which has filed similar lawsuits over solitary confinement.

Williams’ case “is the first to go up on appeal,” said Matthew Feldman, a supervising lawyer with the group, in an interview with the Associated Press. “So I think this opinion definitely will help all those other men whose cases are currently pending in trial courts right now.”

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. MacArthur ‘genius grants’ fellows include…

Careers

MacArthur ‘genius grants’ fellows include law prof, domestic violence researcher

By Debra Cassens Weiss

October 3, 2024, 2:30 pm CDT

Among the winners of the 2024 MacArthur Foundation fellowships, commonly known as “genius grants,” are a law professor who studies racial inequities and a researcher who studies the impact of technology on intimate partner abuse.

The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation announced 22 fellows Tuesday who will each receive no-strings-attached grants of $800,000 paid over five years, report the New York Times and the Associated Press.

The winners include:

  • Dorothy Roberts, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School. Her work has exposed racial inequities embedded within health and social service systems. One topic of her writing has been the prosecution of pregnant Black women for using drugs, she told the New York Times.

“I started this work in 1988,” Roberts told the New York Times. “To get this kind of recognition is very gratifying. Not only for me personally but for all the people, especially Black women, who’ve been devalued in these systems.”

  • Nicola Dell, a computer and information scientist. Dell studied the tactics used by domestic abusers to surveil their intimate partners. Dell co-founded the Clinic to End Tech Abuse. The group is staffed with volunteers who “check survivors’ devices for spyware, disentangle joint accounts, and provide other forms of privacy and safety guidance,” according to the MacArthur Foundation’s description.

  • Loka Ashwood, a professor at the University of Kentucky and a sociologist who has examined environmental injustice and anti-government sentiment in rural communities. She co-authored a book in 2023 that provides an overview of right to farm laws. Intended to protect family farms, the laws have been used by agricultural corporations to boost profits, Ashwood found.

  • Alice Wong, a writer, an editor and a disability activist. Wong founded the Disability Visibility Project “to amplify the unfiltered voices of disabled people and explore the intersections of race, ethnicity, gender identity and disability,” according to the MacArthur Foundation. She has also brought attention to policies that adversely affect people with disabilities, including bans on drinking straws and health care systems that don’t require masks.

Other grant winners include artists, writers, an oceanographer, an evolutionary biologist, historians, a cabaret performer, a filmmaker and an astronomer.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Use of ChatGPT to support fee bid is ‘utterly…

Technology

Use of ChatGPT to support fee bid is ‘utterly and unusually unpersuasive,’ federal judge says

By Debra Cassens Weiss

February 27, 2024, 8:20 am CST

A federal judge in New York City has reduced a law firm’s fee request by about half after criticizing its use of the artificial intelligence tool ChatGPT-4 as a “cross-check” to determine prevailing market rates for attorneys.

U.S. District Judge Paul A. Engelmayer of the Southern District of New York said in a Feb. 22 opinion the Cuddy Law Firm’s use of ChatGPT-4 to reinforce its fee bid is “utterly and unusually unpersuasive,” report Reuters and Law360.

The Cuddy Law Firm had sought $113,484 in fees plus interest. Engelmayer granted feels of $53,050 plus interest.

The proper reference, Engelmayer said, would be the rate paid to comparable lawyers in special education law in the Southern District of New York. The Cuddy Law Firm had represented a child seeking a free appropriate education based on his disabilities, which included disorders relating to language, hyperactivity, attention deficit and stress.

The firm had sought hourly fees of $550 to $600 for senior lawyers, $425 for midlevel associates and $375 for junior associates.

“These hourly rates exceed those awarded in this district, for attorneys of comparable experience, and indeed for some of these very attorneys,” Engelmayer said.

Engelmayer said the firm had cited ChatGPT-4 sources as a “cross-check” to support “problematic sources” regarding hourly billing rates that aren’t specific to lawyers in special education litigation.

“As the firm should have appreciated, treating ChatGPT’s conclusions as a useful gauge of the reasonable billing rate for the work of a lawyer with a particular background carrying out a bespoke assignment for a client in a niche practice area was misbegotten at the jump,” Engelmayer wrote.

Engelmayer cited recent cases in which ChatGPT generated fake case citations.

“In claiming here that ChatGPT supports the fee award it urges, the Cuddy Law Firm does not identify the inputs on which ChatGPT relied. It does not reveal whether any of these were similarly imaginary. It does not reveal whether ChatGPT anywhere considered a very real and relevant data point: the uniform bloc of precedent … in which courts in this district and circuit have rejected as excessive the billing rates the Cuddy Law Firm urges for its timekeepers.

“The court therefore rejects out of hand ChatGPT’s conclusions as to the appropriate billing rates here. Barring a paradigm shift in the reliability of this tool, the Cuddy Law Firm is well advised to excise references to ChatGPT from future fee applications.”

Benjamin Kopp of the Cuddy Law Firm told Reuters that he queried ChatGPT-4 about the rates that clients might expect to be charged by attorneys and questions that clients might ask to determine how rates and fees would be affected by various factors in a case.

He addressed that issue in an August 2023 declaration.

“The underlying assertion was not about ChatGPT’s correctness on rates, but rather, what parents would expect as consumers,” Kopp told Reuters in an email.

U.S. District Judge Paul A. Engelmayer of the Southern District of New York said in a Feb. 22 opinion the Cuddy Law Firm’s use of ChatGPT-4 to reinforce its fee bid is “utterly and unusually unpersuasive,” report Reuters and Law360.

The Cuddy Law Firm had sought $113,484 in fees plus interest. Engelmayer granted feels of $53,050 plus interest.

The proper reference, Engelmayer said, would be the rate paid to comparable lawyers in special education law in the Southern District of New York. The Cuddy Law Firm had represented a child seeking a free appropriate education based on his disabilities, which included disorders relating to language, hyperactivity, attention deficit and stress.

The firm had sought hourly fees of $550 to $600 for senior lawyers, $425 for midlevel associates and $375 for junior associates.

“These hourly rates exceed those awarded in this district, for attorneys of comparable experience, and indeed for some of these very attorneys,” Engelmayer said.

Engelmayer said the firm had cited ChatGPT-4 sources as a “cross-check” to support “problematic sources” regarding hourly billing rates that aren’t specific to lawyers in special education litigation.

“As the firm should have appreciated, treating ChatGPT’s conclusions as a useful gauge of the reasonable billing rate for the work of a lawyer with a particular background carrying out a bespoke assignment for a client in a niche practice area was misbegotten at the jump,” Engelmayer wrote.

Engelmayer cited recent cases in which ChatGPT generated fake case citations.

“In claiming here that ChatGPT supports the fee award it urges, the Cuddy Law Firm does not identify the inputs on which ChatGPT relied. It does not reveal whether any of these were similarly imaginary. It does not reveal whether ChatGPT anywhere considered a very real and relevant data point: the uniform bloc of precedent … in which courts in this district and circuit have rejected as excessive the billing rates the Cuddy Law Firm urges for its timekeepers.

“The court therefore rejects out of hand ChatGPT’s conclusions as to the appropriate billing rates here. Barring a paradigm shift in the reliability of this tool, the Cuddy Law Firm is well advised to excise references to ChatGPT from future fee applications.”

Benjamin Kopp of the Cuddy Law Firm told Reuters that he queried ChatGPT-4 about the rates that clients might expect to be charged by attorneys and questions that clients might ask to determine how rates and fees would be affected by various factors in a case.

He addressed that issue in an August 2023 declaration.

“The underlying assertion was not about ChatGPT’s correctness on rates, but rather, what parents would expect as consumers,” Kopp told Reuters in an email.

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Coca-Cola delivery man who used slurs as…

Disability Law

Coca-Cola delivery man who used slurs as result of Tourette syndrome loses disability suit after job transfer

By Debra Cassens Weiss

February 21, 2024, 12:37 pm CST

A Coca-Cola delivery man whose Tourette syndrome caused him to use profanity and racial slurs when stocking customer stores was not entitled to keep that job under the Americans With Disabilities Act, a federal appeals court has ruled.

The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at Cincinnati ruled against Tennessee driver Cameron Cooper in a Feb. 15 opinion.

HR Dive has coverage, the Volokh Conspiracy has opinion highlights, and the National Law Review has an analysis.

Under the Americans With Disabilities Act, plaintiffs must show that they are disabled. They also must show that they are otherwise qualified for their position without accommodations, with the elimination of a job requirement, or with a reasonable accommodation.

To win the ADA case, the employer then must show that the challenged job requirement is essential and a business necessity, and that any proposed accommodation would be an undue hardship.

Coca-Cola had received at least two complaints from store managers about Cooper’s profanity and racial slurs.

Coca-Cola approved two medical leaves for Cooper; adjusted his route, so that he wouldn’t have to visit Dollar General stores; and allowed him to have a seasonal position as a delivery helper. In December 2019, Coca-Cola moved Cooper to a warehouse position, with negotiated pay of $18.96 per hour instead of the $20.38 per hour that he made as a delivery driver.

Cooper had alleged that the transfer was discriminatory because he was otherwise qualified for the delivery position without an accommodation or, in the alternative, that he was qualified for the position with a reasonable accommodation—an alternative route that was not customer-facing.

The appeals court rejected the arguments in upholding a grant of summary judgment to Coca-Cola.

First, the 6th Circuit determined that “excellent customer service” was an essential function of Cooper’s position. Coca-Cola had identified “excellent customer services skills” in its written job description for Cooper’s job, and Cooper stipulated that those skills were an essential function of the position.

Next, the appeals court concluded that Cooper could not have provided excellent customer service without an accommodation.

“It is undisputed that Cooper used racial slurs, those slurs were decipherable to at least some customers, and the decipherable slurs offended customers,” the 6th Circuit said. “Cooper’s own doctor also stated that Cooper needed an accommodation to perform his job. Based on these facts, the district court did not err in finding that, as a matter of law, Cooper could not provide excellent customer service without an accommodation.”

Finally, the appeals court said Cooper did not identify a reasonable accommodation. He had sought a position that didn’t involve customer interaction, but none was available.

The National Law Review article, written by law firm Bradley Arant Boult Cummings, said the decision has a lesson for employers.

“Although the thought of updating and adding more detail to your written job descriptions may make your HR department grumble, this case demonstrates why good job descriptions are extremely important,” the article said.

“Even something that would seem to be common sense—being able to effectively relate and not offend your customers—may be the key to defending your next lawsuit. [Coca-Cola] defeated this lawsuit because it was able to point to that essential function in the job description, as well as their attempts to figure out any way to accommodate Cooper’s disability.”

1. Home
2. Daily News
3. Federal appeals judge, 96, fails to overturn…

Judiciary

Federal appeals judge, 96, fails to overturn suspension order for refusing to cooperate in fitness probe

By Debra Cassens Weiss

February 7, 2024, 3:32 pm CST

A 96-year-old federal appeals judge who refused to cooperate with medical testing to determine her mental fitness for the bench has failed to persuade a reviewing body that she is entitled to resume deciding new cases.

The U.S. Judicial Conference’s Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability ruled Wednesday against Judge Pauline Newman of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Newman was suspended from hearing new cases for a year in September 2023. The judicial council of the Federal Circuit imposed the suspension because Newman refused to submit to medical evaluations, provide medical records and sit for an interview. Newman had cited the opinions of her doctors, who say she is fit for the job.

The Committee on Judicial Conduct and Disability affirmed the judicial council’s order.

The committee rejected Newman’s argument that the case should have been moved to another circuit, finding that the transfer decision is discretionary. It rejected Newman’s argument that rule violations by the council justified her failure to cooperate. And it rejected her contention that she was denied due process.

“Here, Judge Newman was afforded all the process she was due under the rules,” the committee said.

The committee also cited “voluminous evidence” justifying the order for medical testing. Affidavits and Newman’s emails illustrate interactions “that suggest memory loss, confusion, lack of comprehension, paranoia, anger, hostility, severe agitation and an inability to perform tasks that Judge Newman previously could perform with ease,” the committee said.

The committee also concluded that the one-year suspension of new case assignments, subject to renewal, was appropriate.

“Although the sanction is subject to renewal, unlike other suspensions, Judge Newman has the power to trigger reconsideration or modification if she decides to cooperate,” the Feb. 7 opinion said.

Law360, Bloomberg Law and Reuters have coverage of the opinion.

Bloomberg Law included a comment from Newman’s lawyer, Greg Dolin of the New Civil Liberties Alliance, a nonprofit civil rights organization.

“Obviously, we’re disappointed, but we intend to continue to press our claims” in a separate federal lawsuit pending in Washington, D.C., Dolin said.

The suit challenges the constitutionality of the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act, which governs the proceedings against Newman.

Dolin said Newman is prepared to take her case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, if necessary.

See also:

“Speaking at ABA meeting, federal appeals judge, 96, doesn’t address her suspension but mentions opinion pace”

“Investigations of federal judges are rare and should happen more, former clerk says”

“Federal circuit judge, 95, flunked security training, displayed hacking paranoia, exam order alleges”

“Lawyer for federal appeals judge barred from new cases finds orders ‘incredible’ and ‘stunning’”

“Federal appeals judge should be suspended for failing to cooperate in mental fitness probe, report says”

“How can aging judges know when it’s time to hang up the robe?”

“Weekly Briefs: 96-year-old judge must mediate suit to keep job; DOJ reverses stance on Trump shield”