Margherita v. FedEx Express

Summary

The Second Circuit affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded a summary judgment ruling in favor of FedEx and Joseph Randall. The court held that disputed evidence concerning the validity, necessity, and scope of a hearing-related field test precluded summary judgment on Ross Margherita’s discrimination claims under the ADA, Rehabilitation Act, NYSHRL, and NYCHRL. The court affirmed summary judgment on the hostile work environment and other remaining claims.

Holdings

1. Summary judgment was improper on the ADA and Rehabilitation Act discrimination claims because a reasonable jury could find that the field test was not vital to FedEx's business and was more intrusive than necessary.
2. Summary judgment was improper on the NYCHRL discrimination claim because material factual disputes remained regarding whether the field test was job-related and consistent with business necessity.
3. The district court properly granted summary judgment on the hostile work environment claim because no reasonable juror could find that Margherita was subjected to harassment on the basis of his disability.

Questions Presented

1. Whether summary judgment was proper on Margherita's ADA and Rehabilitation Act discrimination claims where the employer's hearing-related field test may have been an inquiry into the nature or severity of his disability that was not job-related and consistent with business necessity.
2. Whether summary judgment was proper on Margherita's New York City Human Rights Law discrimination claim under the statute's broader and more liberal construction.
3. Whether Margherita presented sufficient evidence to support a disability-based hostile work environment claim under the ADA or applicable New York law.

Disposition

other