In 1997, Ella Williams was fired from her position in the automobile assembly line at Toyota Motor Manufacturing who claimed the firing was due to her poor attendance record. Williams claimed to have carpal tunnel syndrome, leading her to sue Toyota for failing to meet the reasonable accommodations as required in the ADA.

Background of the Case

In a unanimous decision for Toyota, the court claimed that the proper standard for meeting a the demonstration of a substantial limitation in a major life activity of performing manual masks is not examining if the impairment prevents or restricts performing manual tasks that are of central importance to a person's daily life or is will be permanent, creating a long term impact. The argument that being unable to complete specific manual tasks at work is not sufficient enough to meet the protections under ADA.

Decision of Toyota V. Williams


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

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 

Toyota Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Williams, 534 US 184 (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)

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

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

Learn After

Related