Cleveland v. Policy Mgmt. Systems Corp.

U.S. Supreme Court Sheds Light on an Employee's Claim Under the ADA While the Employee Receives Social Security Disability

A decision from the United States Supreme Court in late May, 1999 creates somewhat of a roadblock for employers to successfully claim an often used defense to dismiss lawsuits brought by employees for alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Cleveland v. Policy Mgmt. Systems Corp.

Often termed as "judicial estoppel," the defense is that an employee who applies for and accepts social security disability benefits based upon a claim that he/she is unable to work may not then accuse the employer for failing to accommodate the employee at work. The defense rests on the principal that an employee may not claim an inability to work because of a disability (and receive Social Security Disability (SSDI) benefits) and then later, take an employer to court claiming that the employee was qualified for the job. The defense has been successful in some federal district courts and unsuccessful in others.

The Supreme Court has now spoken and ruled that a plaintiff accepting SSDI is not automatically barred from bringing an ADA claim, but a plaintiff is required to explain why the receipt of SSDI is consistent with his or her ADA claim that he or she can perform the essential functions of the job, at least with a reasonable accommodation. In the unanimous ruling, the Court stated "The two claims do not inherently conflict to the point where courts should apply a special negative presumption," Justice Stephen Breyer wrote on behalf of the Court.

The defense is still available for employers, but it is not absolute. The Supreme Court’s decision creates the opportunity for an aggrieved employee to explain his/her acceptance of benefits in light of his/her claim of discrimination.

Posted 6/1/99