8th Circuit - ADA - Accommodation - Service Animal A newly minted pharmacist with diabetes had a condition that prevented the pharmacist from knowing when blood sugar levels were dropping. Some service dogs are able to provide support and alert a person to a drop of blood sugar levels when trained. Part of the training requires constant involvement between animal and person for a six month period. The pharmacist worked well and was advancing in the job. A service animal became available and the pharmacist sought to bring the animal to work during the six month training period. The employer met with staff and concluded that the animal's presence would jeopardize patient health, so denied the accommodation. The case went to a jury where damages were awarded. On appeal the court reversed because bound by a previous circuit decision that provided: "Providing a service dog at work so that an employee with a disability has the same assistance the service dog provides away from work is not a cognizable benefit or privilege of employment." Hopman, 68 F.4th at 401." So, as a matter of law, the Plaintiff could not overcome the evidence that Plaintiff could perform all of the essential functions of the work without the accommodation and was not denied benefits of the position. Howard vs. City of Sedalia, 231068P.pdf (uscourts.gov)<https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/24/06/231068P.pdf> Charles W. Thompson, Jr. Of Counsel P: (202) 466-5424 x7110 M: (240) 876-6790 D: (202) 742-1016 [facebook icon]<https://www.facebook.com/InternationalMunicipalLawyersAssociation/>[twitter icon]<https://twitter.com/imlalegal>[linkedin icon]<https://www.linkedin.com/company/international-municipal-lawyers-association-inc./> [logo]<https://imla.org/> 51 Monroe St. Suite 404 Rockville, MD, 20850 www.imla.org<http://www.imla.org/>