Skip to Content
Great Lakes ADA Center Logo
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Mailing List
  • Listserv
  • Site Map
  • Acronyms
  • Español
  • Contact Us
  • 800-949-4232(V/TTY) to learn more

   Home » Resources » Supreme Court Cases » 1998 Cases
  • WHAT IS...

    • About Us
    • ADA
    • Technical Assistance
    • Accessible Technology
    • Great Lakes
      Affiliates
    • National Network of ADA Centers
  • INFORMATION

    • Publications
    • Research
    • Legal Briefs
    • Supreme Court Cases
    • Business Tool Kit
    • HOPE Project
  • SERVICES

    • Online Learning Opportunities
    • Training
    • Programs and Services
    • ADA Audio Conference
    • ADA Legal Webinar Series
    • Accessible Technology Webinar Series
  • RESOURCES

    • ADA Resources
    • Current Great Lakes Chronicle
    • Great Lakes Chronicle Archives
    • Current Great Lakes Blog
    • Great Lakes Blog Archives
    • ASL RESOURCE PAGE
    • Employment Resource Hub
QIAT

1998 Cases

Arbitration of Employment Disputes

Pennsylvania Department of Corrections v. Yeskey, 524 U.S. 206 (1998)

Issue: Whether Title II of ADA covers state prisons and prisoners

In a unanimous opinion, the Court held that under the ADA no "public entity" may discriminate against qualified disabled individuals due to their disability. Moreover, the Court stated that the ADA's protections extended to cover prison inmates as well as any other liberated citizen.

Bragdon v. Abbott (1998) The Court holds that HIV infection qualifies as a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

Issue: Can a physician refuse or alter care of an HIV-positive patient without violating the equal treatment stipulations of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA)?

The Court then reasoned that since HIV "substantially limits" major life activities, such as reproduction, the infection is a "disability" that entitles its victims to ADA protections. The Court concluded that only caregivers can determine if treating an HIV-positive individual would constitute a "direct threat" to themselves or others. Therefore, the Court remanded for further risk assessment based on objective medical evidence or risk.

WRIGHT v. UNIVERSAL MARITIME SERVICE CORP. (97-889) 121 F.3d 702

In this case, the Supreme Court revisits the issue of whether a collective bargaining agreement requiring arbitration can prohibit the party from taking their EEO claim to federal court.

The Court held that the collective bargaining agreement at issue did not contain a clear and unmistakable waiver. Therefore, the charging party could pursue his employment discrimination claim in court.

  • 1998 Cases
  • 1999 Cases
  • 2001 Cases
  • 2002 Cases
  • 2003 Cases
  • 2004 Cases
  • 2005 Cases
  • 2017 Cases
 

Last Updated on:
Mon Jun 13, 2022


UIC Department of Disability and Human Development's Logo
ACL Logo

Grant Disclaimer    Accessibility Statement     Contact Us
ADA National Network Logo