John P. Malabarba v. Chicago Tribune Company

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the relevant question is whether the plaintiff can perform the essential functions of his permanent job position—not the functions of a temporary light duty assignment
• stating that “the ADA does not require that employers convert temporary work assignments into permanent positions”
• noting employer’s obligation is to provide some reasonable accommodation, not necessarily the one the employee prefers
• distinguishing Taylor because the plaintiff in that case was assigned to a permanent light-duty assignment, as opposed to a temporary light-duty assignment
• “[A]n employer does not have to accommodate a disabled employee by promoting him or her to a higher level position.”
• “[I]t would be unreasonable for Malabarba to have expected the Tribune to separate the automatic lift operator task out of the multi-duty inserting packager position.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).