No. 21-7085

Kristina Merle Larson v. American Home Products, Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories

Lower Court: Fourth Circuit
Docketed: 2022-02-09
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedRelisted (2)IFP
Tags: ada-compliance disability-discrimination employment-discrimination interactive-process medical-confidentiality psychiatric-disability reasonable-accommodation retaliation termination workplace-retaliation
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Immigration
Latest Conference: 2022-06-02 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Why is it okay for the defendant to completely ignore the plaintiff's request for a reasonable accommodation?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

Questions Presented 1. Why is it okay for the defendant to completely ignore the plaintiff's request for a reasonable | | accommodation? The plaintiff was never notified whether her request was granted. Therefore, , after having been asked to resign, the plaintiff did not know whether to continue working by calling on and visiting doctors and surgeons. She did however, immediately request a reasonable accommodation. | . | | 2. Why is it okay for the plaintiff's employer, the defendant, to discuss the plaintiff’s work issues | | with her psychiatrist, who was also an employer of the defendant, without the plaintiffs | knowledge? 3. Why is it okay for the defendant to humiliate and shame the plaintiff in a restaurant, loudly demanding that she resign, so that other patrons could hear the conversation? , 4, Why is it okay for the defendant to treat the plaintiff differently than he had previously, once | | he found out that her health issue was that of a psychiatric nature? Previously, he had been very encouraging, even requesting that the plaintiff consider short term disability, stating that, “I need , you (the plaintiff) for the long haul;” explaining that he needed her and needed her to be well. 5. Why is it okay for the plaintiffs supervisor to treat the plaintiff differently than another employee who was also having health issues? 6. Did the fact that the plaintiff was taking a medication, manufactured by her employer, (the , | | defendant), effect the company’s decision to terminate her? According to the plaintiffs | | psychiatrist, an expert in his field, the medication is well known amongst doctors, to exacerbate certain disorders. | &|

Docket Entries

2022-06-06
Rehearing DENIED.
2022-05-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/2/2022.
2022-04-20
Petition for Rehearing filed.
2022-03-28
Petition DENIED.
2022-03-10
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/25/2022.
2022-03-08
Waiver of right of respondent American Home Products, Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories to respond filed.
2021-11-24
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 11, 2022)

Attorneys

American Home Products, Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories
Kristina H. VaqueraJackson Lewis, P.C., Respondent
Kristina H. VaqueraJackson Lewis, P.C., Respondent
Kristina Larson
Kristina Merle Larson — Petitioner
Kristina Merle Larson — Petitioner