Indefinite Leave Is Not A Reasonable Accommodation, District Of New Jersey Holds

In Bourhill v. Nextel of New York, Inc., 2013 WL 1680140 (D.N.J. Apr. 17, 2013), an employee with a back condition was granted several consecutive leaves of absences (spanning eight months of leave), followed by an open-ended request for “at least two months” of leave. He was discharged following the last request, and filed disability discrimination, failure to accommodate, and wrongful discharge claims under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD). Rejecting the plaintiff’s case at summary judgment, the New Jersey District Court held that by the time of the termination, the employer had already taken “significant actions to accommodate Plaintiff.” Moreover, as of the time of the plaintiff’s discharge, it was unclear when, or even if, the plaintiff would recover from his impairments and return to work, and the plaintiff and/or his physician incorrectly predicted an estimated return date on each prior occasion. In sum, “[a]t a certain point, holding a job open for an extensive or indeterminate period of time becomes unreasonable.”

Note: This article was published in the September 2013 issue of the New Jersey eAuthority.

- See more at: http://www.ogletreedeakins.com/publications/2013-09-18/indefinite-leave-not-reasonable-accommodation-district-new-jersey-holds#sthash.iSrzV3U8.dpuf

 

In Bourhill v. Nextel of New York, Inc., 2013 WL 1680140 (D.N.J. Apr. 17, 2013), an employee with a back condition was granted several consecutive leaves of absences (spanning eight months of leave), followed by an open-ended request for “at least two months” of leave. He was discharged following the last request, and filed disability discrimination, failure to accommodate, and wrongful discharge claims under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD). Rejecting the plaintiff’s case at summary judgment, the New Jersey District Court held that by the time of the termination, the employer had already taken “significant actions to accommodate Plaintiff.” Moreover, as of the time of the plaintiff’s discharge, it was unclear when, or even if, the plaintiff would recover from his impairments and return to work, and the plaintiff and/or his physician incorrectly predicted an estimated return date on each prior occasion. In sum, “[a]t a certain point, holding a job open for an extensive or indeterminate period of time becomes unreasonable.”

Note: This article was published in the September 2013 issue of the New Jersey eAuthority.

Topics:  Disability, Indefiniteness, Reasonable Accommodation, Unpaid Leave

Published In: Civil Rights Updates, Labor & Employment Updates

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »