Why Claiming Disability Discrimination Will Not Block Termination For Theft
Many disability discrimination and wrongful termination cases involve the sufficiency of a doctor’s note, missing medical documentation, or disagreements over the interactive process between an employee and employer.
This one begins—and ends—with chicken wings.
Only three days after being hired by a hospital as a cook and cashier, Jacqualine Jarju injured her ankle at work. She told management she needed time off to obtain medical treatment, and the hospital removed her from the work schedule until her ankle could be evaluated. About a month later, Jarju requested additional workplace accommodations for medical conditions that predated her employment. She asked for lifting restrictions, an ergonomic chair, and additional breaks. She also submitted a doctor’s note, but the note described her medical symptoms without explaining what accommodations were medically necessary. Human resources repeatedly asked her to obtain clarification from her physician. When her doctor later submitted letters requesting medical leave and restricting her to sedentary work for one month, the hospital assigned Jarju to duties she could perform while sitting.
Then came the chicken wings.
While working at the hospital’s security desk, Jarju watched as food was delivered for a patient. One bag contained chicken wings, and several wings spilled onto the counter. After cleaning up the mess, she placed the wings into her personal bag instead of leaving them for the patient or disposing of them. A security guard witnessed the incident and reported it to human resources. The hospital reviewed surveillance video, which showed Jarju placing the wings into her bag and leaving the building with them. When questioned, Jarju admitted taking the wings home but claimed she later threw them away because they were no longer safe to eat. The court record shows that this was not the first time she had been accused of taking food from the hospital. The employer terminated her employment for repeated food theft.
At this point, you are probably wondering what any of this has to do with disability discrimination or wrongful termination.
The answer is timing.
Although the hospital said it fired her for repeatedly taking food, Jarju argued that the real reason was that she had requested disability accommodations only weeks earlier. She sued under Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), claiming the hospital failed to accommodate her disabilities by giving her a reasonable accommodation and retaliated against her for exercising her rights. The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit rejected those claims, but in doing so explained several important lessons about disability accommodations, medical documentation, the interactive process, and when an employer may lawfully terminate an employee who has requested an accommodation.
Key Takeaways
- Requesting a reasonable accommodation does not prevent an employer from disciplining or terminating an employee for legitimate misconduct.
- Employers may request additional medical documentation as part of the ADA’s interactive process.
- The ADA requires a reasonable accommodation, not necessarily the employee’s preferred accommodation.
- Timing alone rarely proves disability discrimination or retaliation.
- Proving pretext is often the key to winning a disability discrimination or wrongful termination case.
Can I Be Fired After Requesting A Disability Accommodation At Work?
Yes. An employer may fire an employee after the employee requests a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). However, an employer cannot lawfully terminate an employee because the employee requested a reasonable accommodation or because of the employee’s disability. If the employer has a legitimate, nondiscriminatory business reason for the termination, the discharge may be lawful. If that stated reason is merely a pretext for disability discrimination or retaliation, the employee may have a valid ADA claim.
That distinction is at the heart of many wrongful termination, disability discrimination, and ADA retaliation lawsuits. Employees often assume that being fired shortly after requesting a reasonable accommodation automatically proves discrimination. It does not. The law focuses less on when the termination occurred than on why the employer made the decision.
Employers remain free to make legitimate business decisions. They may discipline or terminate employees for misconduct, dishonesty, attendance problems, poor performance, safety violations, policy violations, or other lawful reasons. The ADA protects employees from discrimination—not from legitimate workplace discipline. Likewise, requesting a reasonable accommodation does not insulate an employee from the consequences of misconduct unrelated to the employee’s disability.
The critical question is whether the employer’s stated reason is genuine or merely a pretext. Employment lawyers use the term pretext to describe a false or dishonest explanation offered to conceal an unlawful motive. An employee may establish pretext by showing the employer’s explanation is inconsistent, unsupported by the evidence, changed over time, conflicts with company policy, or was applied differently to similarly situated employees. In many disability discrimination cases, proving pretext is the difference between winning and losing.
The district court summarized this principle succinctly: “Timing alone is rarely enough to establish causation. Suspicious timing ‘combined with additional evidence of pretext’ can justify denial of summary judgment.” Jarju v. St. John’s Hosp. of the Hosp. Sisters of the Third Ord. of St. Francis, No. 23-cv-3038, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59875, at *10–11 (C.D. Ill. Mar. 31, 2025) (quoting Parker v. Brooks Life Sci., Inc., 39 F.4th 931, 937 (7th Cir. 2022)).
That principle decided Jarju. There was no dispute that requesting a reasonable accommodation is protected activity under the ADA or that termination constitutes an adverse employment action. Instead, the case turned on whether the hospital’s stated legitimate business reason for firing Jarju—repeated unauthorized removal of food from the hospital—was genuine or merely a pretext for disability discrimination or retaliation. The district court concluded that the evidence supported the employer’s explanation and that the intervening misconduct defeated any inference that Jarju’s accommodation request caused her termination. The Seventh Circuit affirmed.
Practical Tip: If you are fired after requesting a reasonable accommodation, don’t focus only on the timing of your termination. Carefully examine your employer’s stated reason for firing you. If the evidence shows that reason is false, inconsistent, or merely a pretext for disability discrimination or retaliation, you may have a strong ADA wrongful termination claim.
Best Disability Accommodation At Work Lawyer Blogs on Point:
Can My Employer Ask For More Medical Information Before Approving A Disability Accommodation?
Yes. Under the ADA, an employer may request reasonable medical documentation before approving a reasonable accommodation. When an employee’s disability, work restrictions, or requested accommodation are not obvious, the employer is entitled to obtain enough information to understand the employee’s limitations and determine whether the requested accommodation is medically necessary.
This is part of the ADA’s interactive process—the collaborative discussion between an employer and employee to identify an appropriate reasonable accommodation. The interactive process requires participation by both sides. Employees must provide sufficient medical information to support their requests, and employers must evaluate those requests in good faith.
The Seventh Circuit has described the interactive process as a “flexible give-and-take” between employer and employee. Gile v. United Airlines, Inc., 213 F.3d 365, 373 (7th Cir. 2000). Likewise, the district court emphasized that employees requesting nonobvious accommodations must support those requests with appropriate medical documentation:
“[E]mployees must make their employers aware of any nonobvious, medically necessary accommodations with corroborating evidence such as a doctor’s note . . . before an employer may be required under the ADA’s reasonableness standard to provide a specific modest accommodation that an employee requests.” Jarju v. St. John’s Hosp. of the Hosp. Sisters of the Third Ord. of St. Francis, No. 23-cv-3038, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59875, at *12 (C.D. Ill. Mar. 31, 2025) (quoting Ekstrand v. Sch. Dist. of Somerset, 583 F.3d 972, 976 (7th Cir. 2009)).
That principle guided the hospital’s response in Jarju. Jarju’s initial doctor’s note identified several requested accommodations, but it did not explain why those accommodations were medically necessary. Instead of denying her request or ending the interactive process, the hospital repeatedly asked her physician to provide additional medical documentation clarifying her work restrictions and the need for the requested accommodations. The district court concluded that the hospital acted appropriately by seeking clarification before deciding whether the requested reasonable accommodations were required under the ADA.
Practical Tip: A vague doctor’s note is one of the most common reasons the interactive process stalls. Ask your healthcare provider to identify your specific work restrictions, explain why each requested reasonable accommodation is medically necessary, and describe how your disability affects your ability to perform your job. Clear medical documentation helps employers evaluate accommodation requests more quickly and reduces the likelihood of unnecessary disputes.
Best Disability Discrimination Attorney Blogs on Point:
Can I Still Win A Disability Discrimination Case If My Employer Granted My Disability Accommodation?
Yes. An employer does not automatically defeat a disability discrimination or failure-to-accommodate claim simply because it provided a reasonable accommodation. The real question is whether the accommodation satisfied the employer’s obligations under the ADA.
The ADA requires employers to provide a reasonable accommodation that enables a qualified employee to perform the essential functions of the job. It does not require an employer to provide the employee’s preferred accommodation, the most convenient accommodation, or every accommodation the employee requests. Instead, the employer must engage in the interactive process in good faith and offer an accommodation that is reasonable under the circumstances.
Whether an accommodation is reasonable depends on the facts. An employer may still violate the ADA by refusing to provide an available reasonable accommodation, unreasonably delaying the interactive process, ignoring medical restrictions, or offering an accommodation that does not enable the employee to perform the essential functions of the position. Conversely, when an employer seriously evaluates an accommodation request, works with the employee, and provides an effective accommodation supported by the medical evidence, a failure-to-accommodate claim becomes much more difficult to prove.
That distinction proved decisive in Jarju. After receiving sufficient medical documentation regarding Jarju’s ankle injury, the hospital temporarily reassigned her to sedentary work that complied with her physician’s restrictions while continuing to evaluate her remaining accommodation requests. The district court therefore concluded that “a reasonable jury could not find that St. John’s failed to accommodate Jarju’s requests for accommodation.” Jarju v. St. John’s Hosp. of the Hosp. Sisters of the Third Ord. of St. Francis, No. 23-cv-3038, 2025 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 59875, at *13 (C.D. Ill. Mar. 31, 2025). The Seventh Circuit affirmed.
The lesson is straightforward. The ADA guarantees employees a reasonable accommodation, not a perfect one. Courts evaluate whether the employer’s response effectively addressed the employee’s disability-related limitations—not whether the employee received every accommodation requested. When the evidence shows the employer participated in the interactive process and provided a reasonable accommodation, employees must identify something more than mere dissatisfaction with the employer’s decision to prevail on a failure-to-accommodate claim.
Practical Tip: If your employer provides a reasonable accommodation, don’t assume you no longer have an ADA claim. Instead, ask whether the accommodation actually addressed your disability-related limitations, whether your employer participated in the interactive process in good faith, and whether additional reasonable accommodations were improperly denied. Those questions—not simply whether an accommodation was offered—often determine whether a failure-to-accommodate claim succeeds.
Best Wrongful Termination Law Firm Blogs on Point:
Should I Save Money By Handling My Wrongful Termination Case On My Own?
You have the right to represent yourself in a disability discrimination, failure-to-accommodate, or wrongful termination lawsuit. The better question is whether doing so actually saves you money.
Employment lawsuits are among the most procedurally demanding cases in federal court. Success often depends less on whether discrimination occurred than on whether the employee can obtain evidence through discovery, take effective depositions, respond to motions for summary judgment, present admissible evidence, and prove that the employer’s stated legitimate business reason is merely a pretext for unlawful discrimination or retaliation.
Jarju demonstrates just how challenging these cases can become. She represented herself throughout the litigation and repeatedly asked the district court to appoint counsel. In her third motion, she explained that the “overwhelming legal complexities of her case” made it impossible for her to continue litigating effectively on her own. The district court nevertheless concluded that, based on her education, filings, and the limited pool of volunteer attorneys, she was competent to proceed without counsel. The Seventh Circuit affirmed that decision.
Jarju renewed that argument on appeal, explaining that “the complexity of the case, including written discovery, depositions, and a multi-issue motion for summary judgment, exceeded her capacity as a pro se litigant who lacks legal training.” Although the Seventh Circuit agreed those issues made the litigation more demanding, it concluded the district court had not abused its discretion by declining to recruit counsel.
Her experience highlights an important reality. Employment cases become significantly more complicated after a lawsuit is filed. Discovery deadlines, depositions, evidentiary objections, expert testimony, summary judgment briefing, and appellate issues can determine the outcome long before a jury ever hears the case. Even employees with strong facts can lose if they miss procedural requirements or fail to develop the evidence needed to prove discrimination or pretext.
Fortunately, there is no reason to face those challenges alone. Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm offers a free initial consultation, no upfront costs, and our No Fee Guarantee, meaning you pay no attorney fees unless we recover money for you. You can have an experienced employment lawyer evaluate your disability discrimination, reasonable accommodation, retaliation, or wrongful termination claim without taking on additional financial risk.
For decades, Spitz has represented employees—and only employees—in employment law matters. As one of the nation’s largest employee-only employment law firms, our attorneys know how to uncover evidence through discovery, expose pretext, defeat summary judgment, and present compelling cases at trial. Whether your case involves a denied reasonable accommodation, failure to accommodate, ADA retaliation, or another form of workplace discrimination, we have the experience to help you navigate the legal process from start to finish.
Practical Tip: If you believe your employer discriminated against you because of your disability, denied a reasonable accommodation, retaliated against you for requesting one, or wrongfully terminated your employment, speak with an experienced employment lawyer as early as possible. Early legal advice can preserve evidence, avoid procedural mistakes, and maximize your chances of a successful outcome.
Best Employee’s Rights Attorney Blogs on Point:
Frequently Asked Questions About Disability Discrimination, Reasonable Accommodations, and Wrongful Termination
Yes. An employer may fire an employee after the employee requests a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). However, an employer cannot lawfully terminate an employee because the employee requested a reasonable accommodation or because of the employee’s disability. If the employer has a legitimate, nondiscriminatory business reason—such as theft, dishonesty, serious misconduct, poor performance, attendance problems, or other workplace misconduct—the termination may be lawful. If the employer’s stated reason is false or merely a pretext for disability discrimination or retaliation, the employee may have a valid ADA claim. The critical issue is not when the employee was fired, but why the employer made the decision.
Can My Employer Ask For More Medical Information Before Approving A Disability Accommodation?
Yes. An employer may request reasonable medical documentation to understand an employee’s limitations and determine whether a requested reasonable accommodation is medically necessary. Requesting additional medical information is a normal part of the ADA’s interactive process and is not, by itself, evidence of disability discrimination or retaliation. Employees should provide clear medical documentation identifying their work restrictions, explaining why the requested accommodation is medically necessary, and describing how the disability affects their ability to perform their job.
What Is Pretext In A Disability Discrimination Case?
Pretext is a false or dishonest explanation an employer uses to hide an unlawful reason for an employment decision. In a disability discrimination, ADA retaliation, or wrongful termination lawsuit, an employee may prove pretext by showing the employer’s explanation is inconsistent, unsupported by the evidence, has changed over time, conflicts with company policies, or was applied differently to similarly situated employees. Proving pretext is often the key to showing that an employer’s stated legitimate business reason was actually a cover for unlawful disability discrimination or retaliation.
Does Receiving A Disability Accommodation Mean I Cannot Sue My Employer?
No. Receiving a reasonable accommodation does not automatically prevent an employee from bringing a disability discrimination or failure-to-accommodate claim under the ADA. An employer may still violate the law by denying additional reasonable accommodations, unreasonably delaying the interactive process, retaliating against an employee for requesting an accommodation, or terminating the employee because of the employee’s disability. Whether an employee has a valid ADA claim depends on the employer’s overall conduct and whether it fulfilled its obligations under the ADA—not simply on whether it provided some form of accommodation.
Legal Advertisement.
This employee’s rights blog is for general informational purposes only and is not legal advice. Reading this blog or contacting Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every disability discrimination, reasonable accommodation, ADA retaliation, and wrongful termination case is different, and past results do not guarantee future outcomes. If you believe your employer discriminated against you because of a disability, denied a reasonable accommodation, retaliated against you for requesting an accommodation, or wrongfully terminated your employment, consult an experienced employment lawyer about your specific situation.