ADA
ADA PLAINTIFF COULD NOT PURSUE CLAIMS AFTER SSDI STATEMENT
CAPTION: In Johnson v. ExxonMobil Corporation, 426 F.3d 887 (CA 7 2005), a plaintiff’s claim that he was unable to work because of his disability on his SSDI application judicially estopped both his ADA and ADEA claims.
Gordon Johnson worked at ExxonMobil’s Joliet, Illinois refinery as an Administrative Line Supervisor. ExxonMobil had employed Johnson for over 28 years. Johnson suffered from epilepsy and had had his first epileptic seizure in 1973. He suffered from frequent seizures despite treatment with anti-seizure medication. His seizure disorder as well as the medication he took to control it affected his judgment, memory and his ability to concentrate; his medication also made him drowsy and incoherent. His disorder prohibited him from driving a motor vehicle. Because of the restrictions placed on his life activities by his disorder and the medications used to treat the seizure disorder, Johnson claimed that he was an individual with a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
During his employment with ExxonMobil, Johnson claimed that his supervisor harassed him on a regular basis because of his disability and assigned his job duties to younger employees. Johnson also contended that his supervisor would not provide him with the training necessary to perform his job duties and advance in his career with ExxonMobil but would provide such training to younger employees.
On March 11, 2002, Johnson made known his complaints of age and disability discrimination to Human Resources at ExxonMobil. Three days later, ExxonMobil, through its managers, requested that Johnson sign a Notice of Resignation and voluntarily resign his employment with the company. Johnson thought otherwise of the request and refused to sign the document as he had just one and a half years until retirement. Left with no other choice to bring about the separation, ExxonMobil terminated Johnson’s employment.
ADA Retaliation case does not provide compensatory or punitives