We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.


Clear all

Refine your search

Content type


Firm name


112 results found


Squire Patton Boggs | USA | 15 Aug 2012

Is obesity a disability?

Formerly, Michigan was the only state to explicitly declare weight a protected class according to state discrimination law.


Fisher Phillips | USA | 1 Aug 2012

Montana obesity ruling may be cause for concern

The Americans with Disabilities Amendments Act did not change the definition of impairment but it may have changed the EEOC's view on whether obesity is an impairment.


Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP | USA | 20 Jul 2012

Montana high court rules obesity may be a protected disability

Responding to a question certified by a federal district court, a divided Montana Supreme Court has said that obesity which is not the symptom of a physiological condition may be a “physical or mental impairment” as the terms are used in the Montana Human Rights Act.


Barnes & Thornburg LLP | USA | 11 Jul 2012

Montana Supreme Court holds obesity alone is an impairment

On July 6, 2012, the Montana Supreme Court held that obesity alone, without any underlying physiological disorder or condition, constitutes an impairment for purposes of the Montana Human Rights Act “MHRA).


Sedgwick LLP | USA | 18 Jun 2012

Admissibility of social security disability determination as evidence of causation in a civil suit

Counsel defending serious toxic exposure or personal injury claims are often faced with a determination by the Social Security Administration (SSA) that the plaintiff is disabled.


Fenwick & West LLP | USA | 16 Jul 2009

Employer’s refusal to modify flooring to aid in use of service dog may violate ADA

In McDonald v. Department of Envtl. Quality, the Montana Supreme Court reversed a trial court’s ruling that an employer has no duty to provide accommodations regarding service animals, reasoning that “if a disabled employee’s assistive device is not usable in the workplace, then allowing her to bring the assistive device to work is pointless.”

Previous page 1 2 3 ...