United States Ninth Circuit

In an employment discrimination dispute, although plaintiffs-employees' monocular vision is a disability within the meaning of California's Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), judgment in favor of defendant-employer is affirmed where it has satisfied FEHA's safety-of-others defense.

Appellate Information

• Argued 05/10/2005
• Decided 09/15/2005
• Published 09/15/2005

Judges

• GRABER, Circuit Judge., Before:  KLEINFELD, HAWKINS, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Ninth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Claudia Center and Elizabeth Kristen, The Legal Aid Society Employment Law Center, San Francisco, CA, for the amici curiae.


• For Appellees:
  
• Andrea G. Asaro, Rosen, Bien & Asaro, LLP, San Francisco, CA, for intervenors-appellants and plaintiffs-appellees;  John J. Mavredakis, Law Offices of John J. Mavredakis, Santa Rosa, CA, for the plaintiffs-appellants., Mark A. Perry, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, Washington, D.C., and Kathrin Sears and Rachel Brass, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, San Francisco, CA, for the defendant-appellee/appellant.