This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Employment Law
Disability Discrimination
Retaliation

April Monegas v. City and County of San Francisco Department of Public Health

Published: Dec. 15, 2023 | Result Date: Sep. 1, 2023 | Filing Date: Aug. 10, 2022 |

Case number: 4:22-cv-04633-JSW Bench Decision –  Dismissal

Judge

Jeffrey S. White

Court

USDC Northern District of California


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Pro Per


Defendant

Peter A. Cownan
(Office of the San Francisco City Attorney)

Coby M. Turner
(Seyfarth Shaw LLP)


Facts

Pro se plaintiff April Monegas brought a lawsuit against her former employer City and County of San Francisco Department of Public Health for discrimination and retaliation in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). On May 1, 2023, the court found the lawsuit was time-barred as Monegas failed to initiate the action within 90 days of receiving her right-to-sue letter from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Monegas filed her second amended complaint on May 24, 2023.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff alleged that the City fired her from the position of Senior Administrative Analysis because she declined to get the COVID-19 vaccine without a medical or religious exemption in violation of the ADA. She also maintained that the City's vaccine policy regarded her as disabled and qualified her for protections under the law. Further, plaintiff contended that defendant made prohibited disability-related inquiries and subjected its employees to prohibited medical examinations.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant claimed that nothing in the complaint indicated that plaintiff had any physical or mental conditions of concern or that the City discriminated against her on the basis of a physical or mental disability since a COVID-19 infection does not qualify as a disability.

Result

The court dismissed the case with prejudice.


#142035

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390