This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: arily dismissed most of McAlindin's
asserted major life activities and focused on the major life activity of working. n5 We
thus analyze major life activities here in order to establish whether in addition [**11] to
being impaired, McAlindin raises a genuine issue of material fact as to whether he is
disabled for the purposes of the ADA.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 198 n4 The County has not disputed that McAlindin meets the other statutory requirements of
(1) having an "impairment" and (2) being a "qualified individual," meaning he can
perform the "essential functions" of his job. 42 U.S.C. § 12111(8).
n5 We note that thirteen medical professionals examined McAlindin over a period of
years, and all (even those retained by the government) concluded that McAlindin has a
mental impairment. Four specifically recommended that McAlindin not return to his
previous work setting because it would exacerbate his condition. Many discussed
McAlindin's condition in some depth.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -End Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - According to the EEOC, major life activities include "functions such as caring for
oneself, performing manual tasks, walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, learning,
and working." Id. § 1630.2(i). n6 "The first question is whether an individual is [**12]
substantially limited in a major life activity other than working (e.g., sleeping,
concentrating, caring for oneself)." Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, EEOC
Enforcement Guidance on the Americans with Disabilities Act and Psychiatric
Disabilities 3 (March 25, 1997) [hereinafter EEOC on Psychiatric Disabilities]. We
conclude that the other activities - specifically, sleeping, engaging in sexual relations, and
interacting with others - asserted by McAlindin are "major life activities" within the
meaning of the ADA, and thus we need not address the district court's conclusion that he
was not substantially limited in his ability to work. See Taylor v. Phoenixville Sch. Dist.,
174 F.3d 142, 152 (3d C...
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.
- Spring '08