Nancie Cloe v. City of Indianapolis

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the accommodation process began when the plaintiff submitted a note from her doctor specifically requesting parking accommodations, not when she mentioned that she was having trouble walking
• holding that an employer reasonably accommodated an employee even though the employer took some three months to provide any accommodation and an additional two months to provide the employee’s requested accommodation
• 5-month delay not unreasonable where employer-provided interim accommodations were deemed “insufficient” but only in retrospect
• “It is the employer’s prerogative to choose a reasonable accommodation; an employer is not required to provide the particular accommodation that an employee requests.”
• “If this process fails to lead to reasonable accommodation of the disabled employee’s limitations, responsibility will lie with the party that caused the breakdown.” (quotation omitted)
• “We do not think a reasonable jury could find that the delay here [of two weeks to one month] in tracking down a new piece of equipment was unreason‐ able.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).