CourtCases2010

National assn of business educational radio inc 53 f3d

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: 9 F.3d 1290 (11th Cir.2009), which likewise concludes that the activity involved in a hostile work environment claim does not require the plaintiff herself to be targeted. As the Eleventh Circuit has vacated its opinion in order to consider the case en banc, however, we do not rely on it, even though we agree with its reasoning. Accordingly, we conclude that the trial court erred in granting a directed verdict with respect to both counts of Ms. Blizzard's claim. There was, we conclude, sufficient evidence to have this case considered by the jury. We, therefore, reverse and remand for a new trial. REVERSED and REMANDED. GRIFFIN and ORFINGER, JJ., concur. END OF DOCUMENT 282 Case # 30 LARIMER vs. IBM United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit. Thomas LARIMER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORP., Defendant-Appellee. No. 03-2256. Argued Dec. 11, 2003. Decided June 3, 2004. Background: Employee, a salesman with twin daughters who had variety of serious medical conditions resulting from their premature birth, brought suit against employer under Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) after he was discharged. The United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Joan Humphrey Lefkow, J., 2003 WL 1989649, granted summary judgment for employer. Employee appealed. Holdings: The Court of Appeals, Posner, Circuit Judge, held that: (1) case did not fit within "expense," "disability by association," or "distraction" categories under ADA association section, and (2) employee failed to establish prima facie case of retaliation under ERISA. Affirmed. Possible, or even probable, future disability cannot trigger protections of ADA, unless individual is mistakenly regarded by his employer as having disability. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, § 3(2), 42 U.S.C.A. § 12102(2); 29 C.F.R. § 1630.8. Three types of situation are within intended scope of rarely litigated asso...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 09/30/2012 for the course ENC 102 taught by Professor Deria during the Spring '08 term at FIU.

Ask a homework question - tutors are online