Last month, in Nawara v. Cook County Municipality, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals said a violation of ADA protections from medical examinations or inquiries counts as discrimination on account of disability, regardless of whether a disability exists.
Plaintiff John Nawara, a Cook County Jail correctional officer, was placed on leave after initiating several altercations with his coworkers. Before he could return to work, his employer required him to undergo a fitness-for-duty examination, which involved signing two medical information release forms. He refused to sign the forms and remained on leave.
His paid leave eventually became unpaid leave until he relented and signed the release forms. Before signing the forms, Nawara filed suit against the county, alleging that the examination requirement and inquiry into his mental health violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Nawara prevailed at trial but was awarded no damages. He then moved post-trial for equitable relief, seeking, among other things, back pay. Under the applicable remedy provision, the court reasoned that it was barred from awarding back pay where an employee suffers an adverse employment action for any reason other than discrimination on account of a disability.
Thus, the district court's ruling hinged on what constituted "discrimination on account of a disability." The court determined that to meet this definition, a plaintiff must have an actual or perceived disability. Because Nawara made no such claim that he was disabled or that the county perceived him as disabled, the court denied his request for back pay. Nawara's appeal followed.
On appeal, the Seventh Circuit disagreed with the district court's reading of the ADA that "medical examination and inquiries" are merely a means of discriminating, not discrimination itself. In reaching its ruling, the Seventh Circuit rejected the county's argument that this reading goes against the commonly understood meaning of "discrimination."
Instead, the appellate court reasoned that Congress could define "discrimination on the basis of disability" however it chooses, such as for discrimination within the ADA to encompass "medical examinations and inquiries into an employee's disability status." Accordingly, the Seventh Circuit determined that Nawara may be entitled to back pay despite his non-disability if discrimination occurred as defined by the ADA—namely, an unlawful inquiry into his disability status.
The decision is immediately binding on employers in Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin. Although the Seventh Circuit ruling is limited to ADA protections against discrimination based on an employee being subjected to unlawful medical examination or inquiries—regardless of the employee's disability or non-disability—it remains to be seen whether this interpretation will extend to other provisions of the ADA.
If you or your company have any questions about the Seventh Circuit's recent ADA ruling, or how to best handle complying with the ADA, while reducing the risk of liability, please contact the authors or any attorney in Venable's Labor and Employment Group.