Rejecting the plaintiff's claim that the employer did not provide two accommodations quickly enough, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals said that reasonable accommodation under the ADA "is a process, not a one-off event" and that the employer engaged in that process appropriately. Cloe v. City of Indianapolis (7th Cir. April 9, 2013)

The plaintiff, who had multiple sclerosis, had asked for a printer in her office to minimize her need to walk. The city provided the printer two weeks to a month after the request. In rejecting the plaintiff’s claim that it took too long for the city to provide the printer, the court said that "a responsible government is entitled to take time to evaluate alternatives before spending taxpayer money."

The plaintiff had also asked for preferred parking to reduce the length of her walk. The city assigned her to a different lot and when that didn't work out, gave her a special parking pass, and when that didn't work, gave her an assigned parking spot in her building. Rejecting the plaintiff’s claim that the city should have given her the parking spot "immediately," the court said the city had acted with "reasonable speed" in coming up with the initial and subsequent accommodations.