2 sisters had severe myopic vision of 20/200 and worse without corrective measures. With proper vision correction, their vision is as good as individuals without a vision impairment. They applied to be respondents with United Airlines but were rejected from the position because the minimum uncorrected vision requirement for respondents is 20/100 or better for United Airlines. The sisters filed a suit under the ADA for disability discrimination.

The Background of Sutton V. United Airlines

In a 7-2 conclusion, the court sided with United Airlines in that determining a disability under the ADA must be made in reference to any mitigation or corrective measures the individual uses. The implication of this is that if a disability is corrected by a medication or an assistive device, ADA protections no longer apply to that individual unless the condition still substantially limits the person's life.

The Outcome and Implications of the Sutton V. United Airlines Case

This case decided the question if corrective and mitigating measures should be considered when determining whether an individual is disabled under the ADA.

Michigan State University

Includes court cases that used the ADA as the basis of supporting evidence for arguments, cases that changed/amended the ADA, cases that defined definitions, and more. 

Court Cases Regarding the ADA in the United States 

Sutton V. United Airlines, 537 U.S. 471 (1999)

This case questions what the proper standard under the ADA is when determining if an individual is substantially limited in performing manual tasks. 

Toyota Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc., v. Williams (2002)

Ronald Yeskey was sentenced to a 18-36 month stay in prison and got recommended to participate in a Motivational Boot camp available for first time offenders; the purpose of the boot camp was that it would grant Yeskey parole after 6 months. The Department of Corrections refuse his acceptance into the camp once discovering he had a history of hypertension, to which Yeskey claimed as discriminatory and brought it to the courts. 

Pennsylvania Department of Corrections v. Yeskey (1998)

The issue examined in this case was whether the ADA requires a professional sports organization (the PGA) to make modifications for a participant with a disability.

PGA Tour V. Martin (2001)

Sutton V. United Airlines(1999)

Many courts have ruled that presence is an essential function of employment, which considering many people cannot meet without the necessary accommodations, has turned the matter of absenteeism into a rule of law - siding in favor of employers experiencing “undue hardship” as such rather than disabled workers.

Learn Before

Related

Learn After