You asked what effect three recent U. S.  Supreme Court cases concerning the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) will have on state laws concerning employment discrimination against the disabled and whether the ADA applies to individuals who are temporarily injured.

SUMMARY

Three recent U. S.  Supreme Court decisions held that when determining whether an individual is disabled under the ADA judges must consider mitigating factors.  For example, an individual who claims that he satisfies the definition of disabled under the ADA based on poor vision will not satisfy the definition if his vision is correctable with glasses.

These cases affect claims filed under the federal ADA and judges interpreting disability discrimination claims under state law need not follow the Supreme Court's decisions.  However, when determining whether an individual qualifies as disabled under state definitions, judges could adopt the Supreme Court's rule.

DISABILITY DEFINITION UNDER THE ADA

The ADA bars employers with at least 15 employees from discriminating against applicants or employees based on their disabilities.  To qualify for protection an employee or applicant must be disabled, have a record of a substantially limiting impairment, or be regarded as having such an impairment.

The ADA defines disability as a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits a major life activity.  What constitutes a major life activity has been litigated many times.  The term includes hearing, seeing, speaking, breathing, performing manual tasks, walking, caring for oneself, learning, or working.

After three recent U. S.  Supreme Court cases, courts must consider any mitigating or corrective measures (such as glasses) the plaintiff uses when determining whether he has a qualifying disability (Sutton v.  United Airlines, 119 S. Ct.  2139 (1999); Murphy v.  United Parcel Service, 119 S. Ct.  2133 (1999); Albertsons, Inc.  v.  Kirkinburg, 119 S. Ct.  2162 (1999)).  Plaintiffs will now have to demonstrate that their impairment, after the use of mitigating measures, still substantially limits them in a major life activity.  It is not apparent whether the decisions require plaintiffs to try to mitigate their impairments to qualify for ADA coverage.

DISABILITY DEFINITION UNDER STATE LAW

State law prohibits employers with at least three employees from refusing to hire;  discharging;  or discriminating against applicants or employees in employment compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges based on present or past history of mental disorder, mental retardation, learning disability, or physical disability, including blindness.

Physical disability is defined as any individual who has a chronic physical handicap;  infirmity or impairment, whether congenital or resulting from bodily injury, organic processes, or changes;  or from illness, including epilepsy;  deafness or hearing impairment;  or reliance on a wheelchair or other remedial appliance or device (CGS  46a-51(15)).

Blindness is defined as visual acuity that does not exceed 20/200 in the better eye with correcting lenses or acuity greater than 20/200 but accompanied by a limitation in the field of vision so that the widest diameter of the visual field is at an angle less than 21 degrees (CGS  46a-51(1)).

Mental retardation is defined as a significantly sub-average general intellectual functioning existing concurrently with deficits in adaptive behavior and manifested during the developmental period (CGS  46a-51(13)).

A learning disability is defined as a severe discrepancy between educational performance and measured intellectual ability and a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written, which may manifest itself in a diminished ability to listen, speak, read, write, spell, or to do mathematical calculations (CGS  46a-51(19)).

The term “mental disorder” is not defined in statute.

TEMPORARILY INJURED EMPLOYEES

A temporarily injured employee may qualify for ADA protection if his injury is severe enough to substantially limit a major life activity.  Employers must evaluate worker injuries on a case-by-case basis to determine whether the ADA covers them.  In general, injuries such as broken limbs do not substantially limit employees in a major life activity because such injuries are of a limited duration and tend to have no long-term effect.

LJ: gt