To Tell the Truth: Should Judicial Estoppel Preclude Americans with Disabilities Act Complaints?

St. John's Law Review, Vol. 73, No. 2, pp. 349-374, Spring 1999

27 Pages Posted: 26 Oct 2009

See all articles by Christine Neylon O'Brien

Christine Neylon O'Brien

Boston College - Carroll School of Management

Multiple version iconThere are 2 versions of this paper

Date Written: October 26, 1999

Abstract

This article analyzes the use of the doctrine of judicial estoppel as a bar to an Americans with Disabilities Act claim where the plaintiff has previously asserted a total disability in order to obtain social security benefits. The author argues against an automatic estoppel rule as there are compelling reasons and particularized findings in such cases. Judicial estoppel allows courts to unilaterally terminate claims before they are fully articulated and before they are tested at trial, which the author points out is inappropriate to such cases where intense fact finding is necessary. Noting the legislative history as objectives of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the author suggests amending current legislation as EEOC guidance is not binding on courts.

Suggested Citation

O'Brien, Christine Neylon, To Tell the Truth: Should Judicial Estoppel Preclude Americans with Disabilities Act Complaints? (October 26, 1999). St. John's Law Review, Vol. 73, No. 2, pp. 349-374, Spring 1999 , Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1494570

Christine Neylon O'Brien (Contact Author)

Boston College - Carroll School of Management ( email )

140 Commonwealth Avenue
Business Law Department
Chestnut Hill, MA 02467
United States
(617) 552-0413 (Phone)
(617) 552-0414 (Fax)

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
27
Abstract Views
372
PlumX Metrics