Murphy v. United Parcel Service, Inc.

Summary

Justice O'Connor's opinion for the Court held that mitigating measures must be considered when determining disability under the ADA and that Murphy failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact that UPS regarded him as substantially limited in working. Following Sutton, the Court assessed Murphy's hypertension in its medicated state; whether his remaining limitations or medication side effects constituted a disability was outside the grant of certiorari. Assuming the validity of the EEOC regulations, the Court further concluded that UPS's perception that Murphy could not obtain DOT certification showed, at most, inability to perform a particular job rather than a class of jobs. The Court affirmed summary judgment for UPS. Justice Stevens, joined by Justice Breyer, dissented, reasoning that Murphy's severe hypertension should be assessed without medication and qualified as a disability; he would reverse and remand for consideration of Murphy's qualifications and ability to perform essential job functions.