What were the 2 legal issues in the Hoffman v Caterpillar case? What did the court decide? For each issue try to write using a brief version of the IRAC (Issue-Rule-Application-Conclusion). There will be two IRAC analyses, one for each issue. Finally, what do you think will be the final outcome of this case? Was it decided fairly in your opinion? Why or why not?
Under the ADA, proof of disparate treatment is one of the issues, and the second is if the refusal to train Hoffman is failure to accommodate. These two issues are at the core of the ADA law and while there are ways suggested to prove such allegations as those shown here, the summary judgment without proper consideration is the heart of the appeal.
The court held that the disparate treatment could only be settled in terms of recovery, the fact that there was discrimination was proven by her supervisor who admitted it was her disability that kept him from honoring her training request. She did not have to show materially adverse employment. If Hoffman can prove she can run the machine, then she request recovery. The second, failure to accommodate, was decided in favor of Caterpillar if Hoffman could not prove she could run the machine on her own.
1. Disparate treatment. If the refusal of the company to train Hoffman on a machine ...
The expert examines Hoffman versus caterpillar court decisions.