Jones v. Nationwide Life Insurance, 847 F. Supp. 2d 218

Jones, a Retirement Program Services Director for Nationwide Life Insurance, oversaw sales reps selling 401(k)-like plans via Nationwide Retirement Services, Inc. (NRS).
Unbeknownst to Nationwide, Jones suffered brachial plexus palsy from a 1979 motorcycle accident, causing left-arm impairment and reduced manual dexterity.
In 2006-2008, Jones required shoulder surgery, followed by a period of recovery and pain management, while continuing to perform substantially well at work.
In 2007-2008 Nationwide began requiring employees selling ProAccount to pass FINRA Series 65/66 and become registered investment advisers; Jones repeatedly failed the exam.
Jones sought an accommodation to extend the testing period (December 2008) due to surgery and health; Nationwide denied the extension and eventually terminated him for failure to obtain the credential.
The court held that the disability standard under pre-ADAA law applied, ADA Amendments Act standards do not retroactively apply, and there was insufficient evidence of a qualifying disability or a reasonable accommodation that would have changed the outcome.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was Jones disabled under ADA/MA 151B standards?	Jones alleges a disability due to brachial plexus palsy affecting major life activities.	No substantial, long-term impairment; job performance was not hindered, and no major life activity was substantially limited.	No disability under either standard; insufficient evidence of long-term substantial limitation.
Was a reasonable accommodation available to Jones that would have allowed him to perform his job?	Additional time to study could have enabled passing the Series 65.	Numerous prior opportunities already offered; further time was speculative and unlikely to succeed while on medications.	Accommodation not reasonable as a matter of law.
Does ADA Amendments Act apply retroactively to conduct occurring before its effective date?	A more generous standard should apply since termination occurred within the window around the Act's effective date.	ADAA is not retroactive; conduct occurred before its effective date.	ADAA does not apply retroactively; summary judgment sustained on disability grounds.

Ward v. Mass. Health Research Inst., Inc., 209 F.3d 29 (1st Cir. 2000) (framework for ADA analyses under unified standard)
Toyota Motor Mfg., Ky., Inc. v. Williams, 534 U.S. 184 (U.S. 2002) (pre-ADAA demanding standard for disability)
Thornton v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 587 F.3d 27 (1st Cir. 2009) (ADAA not retroactive)
Milholland v. Sumner County Bd. of Educ., 569 F.3d 562 (6th Cir. 2009) (ADAA retroactivity discussion)
Faiola v. APCO Graphics, Inc., 629 F.3d 43 (1st Cir. 2010) (need for substantial impairment to qualify as disability)
Soignier v. American Bd. of Plastic Surgery, 92 F.3d 547 (7th Cir. 1996) (work-related impairment must affect major life activity)
Evans v. Fed. Express Corp., 133 F.3d 137 (1st Cir. 1998) (reasonableness in accommodation analysis)
Martin v. Southwest Virginia Gas Co., 135 F.3d 307 (4th Cir. 1998) (accrual timing for discrimination claims)