Second Circuit in Natofsky v. NYC Joins Several Other Federal Appeals Courts in Holding That “But-For” Standard Applies to Discrimination Claims Brought Under the ADA

In an issue of first impression before it, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has ruled that plaintiffs suing for disability discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) must prove that disability was the “but-for” cause of, not merely a motivating factor for, the challenged adverse employment action. 

In Natofsky v. City of New York, No. 17-2757 (2d Cir. April 18, 2019), the plaintiff sued the City under the federal Rehabilitation Act, accusing it of discriminating against him because of his hearing impairment and retaliating against him for having complained internally about his unfair treatment.     

Analyzing the case by applying ADA principles, a divided three-judge panel rejected the plaintiff’s contention that the less stringent “motivating factor” test codified in Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII) applies to cases brought under the ADA. The Second Circuit thus has now joined the Fourth, Sixth, and Seventh Circuits in finding that claims brought under the ADA are subject to the but-for causation test. NT Lakis is not aware of any circuit courts that have ruled the other way.

Members of the Center for Workplace Compliance (CWC) can read more here.