McClain v. Shaker Heights, 2011 Ohio 4418

McClain began as a custodian for Shaker Heights in 1997 with medium-load duties.
In July 2005, she sustained a work injury lifting 50–55 pounds overhead and went on medical leave.
Between Aug 2005 and June 2006 doctors repeatedly limited use of her left arm and lifting.
A Functional Capacity Evaluation (FCE) showed she could not meet original job lifting demands; a subsequent FCE confirmed continued inability to lift as required.
Shaker terminated McClain on July 28, 2006 after a medical assessment that she was unable to perform custodian duties.
McClain sued for disability discrimination; Shaker moved for summary judgment and the trial court granted it; on appeal the judgment was affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Shaker regarded McClain as disabled	McClain contends Shaker regarded her as disabled due to lifting restrictions	Shaker did not regard McClain as disabled; concern was job-specific abilities	No genuine issue; Shaker did not regard her as disabled; summary judgment affirmed

Sadinsky v. EBCO Mfg. Co., 134 Ohio App.3d 54 (1999) (regarding disability definition and major life activities)
Gayer v. Continental Airlines, Inc., 21 F. App'x 347 (C.A.6. 2001) (employer awareness of health problems not equivalent to disability)
Kocsis v. Multi-Care Mgmt., Inc., 97 F.3d 876 (C.A.6. 1996) (regarded as disabled requires substantial limitation review)
Columbus Civ. Serv. Comm. v. McGlone, 82 Ohio St.3d 569 (1998) (use of federal ADA guidance for Ohio law interpretation)
Sullivan v. River Valley School Dist., 197 F.3d 804 (C.A.6. 1999) (perception of health problems affecting job is not disability)
Milholland v. Sumner County Bd. of Educ., 569 F.3d 562 (C.A.6. 2009) (ADA Amendments Act retroactivity not applied to pre-amendment conduct)