Select Page

Learning Goal: I’m working on a writing question and need an explanation and answer to help me learn.
Holbrook v. City of Alpharetta, Ga. 112 F.3d 1522 (1997)
Did I Find the Way the Court Found?
On May 22, 1997, The United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia granted summary Judgement in favor of the City of Alpharetta. The court found that the city (defendants) decision to cease making accommodations did not violate ADA. The court also found that Holbrook could not use Title II of ADA did not go into effect until Title, and Holbrook could not use the 1983 Act in lieu of Rehabilitation Act or ADA.
I did find in favor of the City of Alpharetta, although I feel bad for Det. Holbrook and I want police departments to look out for injured officers.
What Holbrook wanted went way beyond the accommodations an employer must provide. The Metropolitan Police Department has a general order specifying its ADA policy and why the department would deny an employee’s request for accommodation.
General Order 100 V Section A, “An employee may request a reasonable accommodation.”
General Order 100 section V. MPD can deny an employee’s ADA request for “D. #5 The employee’s request for a reasonable accommodation would create an undue hardship on the operation of the MPD, and there is no alternative reasonable accommodation.”
“D. #6 The employees’ requested accommodation would pose a direct threat to the health or safety of the employee, coworkers, or the general public.”
The Americans with Disabilities Act strives to keep an employee with a disability employed. However, law enforcement employers must balance the ADA with the safety of both the officer and other employees.
No less than 100 words , respond to this persons discussion