Cassimy v. Board of Education of the Rockford Public Schools, District # 205
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
461 F.3d 932 (2006)
- Written by Daniel Clark, JD
Facts
Glenn Cassimy (plaintiff) worked successfully as a principal at two schools within the Rockford Public Schools (district) (defendant) before being reassigned to a third school, Washington Communication Academy (Washington). While at Washington, Cassimy was the subject of complaints by both parents and staff about his inaccessibility and inability to manage school discipline. Cassimy alleged that the Washington job caused him to suffer from severe depression, leading him to take a leave of absence. Cassimy alleged that he was so distressed that he could not read, write, eat, or sleep, although he did not report these symptoms to his doctors. Cassimy and the district explored several options for Cassimy to return to work at the district; however, the two sides could not agree on mutually acceptable terms. Cassimy ultimately chose to leave the district. Over the following several years, Cassimy worked successfully as an administrator in the New York City public schools and as a teacher in the Chicago public schools. After leaving his district position, Cassimy sued the district. Among other claims, Cassimy alleged that the district violated his rights as a disabled person under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) by failing to accommodate his severe depression. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the district, holding that Cassimy was not disabled for the purposes of the ADA, and Cassimy appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Wood, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 833,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.