Stanley v. City of Sanford
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Stanley v. City of Sanford and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Stanley v. City of Sanford.
Karyn Stanley, a former firefighter for the City of Sanford, Florida, sued the city under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) after a policy change reduced her health insurance benefits upon retiring due to disability. The district court dismissed her claim, and the Eleventh Circuit affirmed, stating she was not a 'qualified individual' under the ADA post-retirement. The Supreme Court affirmed the lower courts' decisions.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Stanley v. City of Sanford.
The Court held that the judgment of the Eleventh Circuit is affirmed.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Stanley v. City of Sanford. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Equal Protection is relevant to Stanley v. City of Sanford
The case involves a claim of unequal treatment under the Americans with Disabilities Act, which is related to equal protection principles.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Ms. Stanley sued, claiming the City violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by providing different health-insurance benefits to those who retire with 25 years of service and those who retire due to disability.
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Stanley v. City of Sanford that support the summary and concepts above.
The district court dismissed her ADA claim, reasoning that the alleged discrimination occurred after she retired.
Ms. Stanley sued, claiming the City violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by providing different health-insurance benefits.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed.
