Grenier v. Cyanamid Plastics, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
70 F.3d 667 (1995)

- Written by Miller Jozwiak, JD
Facts
Andre Grenier (plaintiff) was an electrician for Cyanamid Plastics, Inc. (Cyro) (defendant). After a workplace investigation, Grenier suffered from anxiety that prevented him from working with colleagues and led to him taking a leave of absence. Grenier’s employment automatically terminated when Grenier ran out of leave time. Grenier continued to receive disability benefits for two years after his termination. After those benefits ended, Grenier sought reemployment in the same electrician position. Cyro responded with a request for a note from Grenier’s physician certifying that Grenier could return to work without restrictions or identifying any necessary reasonable accommodations. Grenier claimed that he could perform the job but failed to provide medical documentation or to describe the necessity of any reasonable accommodations. After Cyro denied his application, Grenier sued the company for violating the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The district court entered summary judgment for Cyro. Grenier appealed and argued that Cyro’s pre-offer inquiries violated the ADA. Specifically, Grenier argued that (1) the request for a medical certification was too broad in that it went beyond seeking information about his technical qualifications and (2) any request for a medical certification was prohibited at the preemployment-offer stage.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Saris, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 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.