Norden v. Samper

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “[i]f accommodation cannot be made in the employee’s current position,” only then must the employer “consider the feasibility of” reassignment
• holding that assigning “a Fulbright Scholar who had published several research papers ... to the full-time cataloguing of insect specimens was demeaning and transparently punitive” and could justify a retaliation claim under the Rehabilitation Act
• finding that an employer did not accommodate an employee’s disability by affording “a sham proposal (a ‘flexible’ schedule that was actually inflexible)”
• explaining that “accommodations are reasonable if they allow the employee to perform the essential functions of the job without imposing undue hardship on the employer”
• a proposed settlement agreement that included, among other terms, a prohibition on the plaintiffs use of medically necessary absences to extend deadlines constituted a materially adverse action
• a proposed settlement agreement that included, among other terms, a prohibition on the plaintiffs use of medically necessary absences to extend deadlines constituted a materially adverse action

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).