Re: Texas Court to Consider: Is Mold-Related Illness a Disability?

[Guest guest]

Members,

If you or someone you know feel you should qualify for SSI/SSDI and

are having a very difficult time being accepted/denied please

contact me. I may be able to help.

Thanks,

KC

--- In , " tigerpaw2c " <tigerpaw2c@y...>

wrote:

>

> Tuesday, January 20, 2004

>

> Texas Court to Consider: Is Mold-Related Illness a Disability?

>

> http://acca.blogs.com/accabuzz/legal_issues/index.html

>

> A federal court in Texas recently found sufficient dispute as to

the

> facts in a case involving the effects of mold on the ability of a

> plaintiff to perform her job and denied defendant City of San

> 's motion to dismiss the case outright. The plaintiff

worked

> for the defendant city for several years when she developed a

> respiratory condition known as chronic rhinitis (as well as being

> diagnosed with " sick building syndrome " ), which allegedly resulted

> from her exposure to certain building-borne molds at defendant's

> offices.

>

> The City attempted abatement of any mold or fungus problems, but

> plaintiff continued to contend her inability to work at the

offices,

> and refused to return to work until the facility was pronounced

mold-

> free, and subsequently filed a claim against the City alleging

> violation of state and federal anti-disability-discrimination

> statutes under the Americans with Disabilities Act ( " ADA " ) and the

> Texas Labor Code ( " the Code " ).

>

> Defendant claimed that plaintiff's claim under the ADA should be

> dismissed as a matter of law because she failed to meet all the

> requisite elements of such a claim, namely, that she failed to

> establish that her condition constituted a disability as

> contemplated by the ADA (and similarly, that she is disabled), and

> secondly that she failed to establish that her accommodation

request

> was reasonable or that such an accommodation would allow her to

> perform her essential job functions. The judge in the Western

> District of Texas, San Division, disagreed, and allowed

the

> case to go forward, finding triable issues of material fact

existed

> regarding her cause of action for disability discrimination under

> the Code and the ADA.

>

> Posted by Atkins at 04:22 PM in Legal Issues | Permalink |

> Comments (0)

>