Crumbaker

Crumbaker v. Regence Bluecross Blueshield

Good Law
22 F. App'x 809
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 19, 2001No. 00-35685; D.C. No. CV-99-00478-AJBCalifornia193 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

The district court did not err in granting summary judgment for defendants on Crumbaker’s claim of discrimination on the basis of disability. “[0]ne must have an actual disability” to sue under this provision of the Americans with Disabilities Act, Sutton v. United Air Lines, Inc., 527 U.S. 471, 478 , 119 S.Ct. 2139 , 144 L.Ed.2d 450 (1999), and plaintiffs self-diagnosis, plaintiff lacking adequate qualifications, is insufficient to make a prima facie showing of *810 disability. See 42 U.S.C. § 12102 (2)(A) (2000).

Nor did the district court err in granting defendants summary judgment on plaintiffs claim that she suffered discrimination because defendants regarded her as disabled. See 42 U.S.C. § 12102 (2)(C) (2000). Plaintiff failed to make a prima facie showing that defendants believed she had an “impairment that substantially limits one or more of [her] major life activities.” 42 U.S.C. § 12102 (2)(A) (2000). Defendants’ knowledge of plaintiffs purported impairment was insufficient to demonstrate that they regarded her as disabled.

AFFIRMED.

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.