42 U.S.C. § 12102
Definition of disability
For purposes of paragraph (1), major life activities include, but are not limited to, caring for oneself, performing manual tasks, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, standing, lifting, bending, speaking, breathing, learning, reading, concentrating, thinking, communicating, and working.
For purposes of paragraph (1), a major life activity also includes the operation of a major bodily function, including but not limited to, functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, endocrine, and reproductive functions.
This chapter, referred to in text, was in the original “this Act”, meaning Pub. L. 101–336,
The ADA Amendments Act of 2008, referred to in par. (4)(B), is Pub. L. 110–325,
2008—Pub. L. 110–325 amended section generally. Prior to amendment, section consisted of pars. (1) to (3) defining for purposes of this chapter “auxiliary aids and services”, “disability”, and “State”.
Amendment by Pub. L. 110–325 effective
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6,582
cases (2,184 in the last 5 years), 1992–2026 · leading case: Jacqueline Lewis v. City of Union City, Georgia
Jacqueline Lewis v. City of Union City, Georgia (2019)
“Ms. Lewis argues that she meets the definition of “disabled” under both the “actually disabled” and the “regarded as disabled” prongs.”
Mancini v. City of Providence (2018)
“In that regard, the ADA offers three alternative definitions of disability: "a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities," 42 U.S.C. § 12102 (1)(A) 4 ; "a record of such an impairment," id.”
Bragdon v. Abbott (1998)
“major life activities," or is so perceived, 42 U. S. C. §§ 12102 (2)(A), (C), including the afflicted individual's family relations, employment potential, and ability to care for herself, see 45 CFR § 84.”
Audrey Jacques, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Dimarzio, Inc., Defendant-Appellant-Cross-Appellee (2004)
“) awarding $190,000 in damages to Plaintiff Audrey Jacques, a former DiMarzio employee who alleged that DiMarzio fired her because she was “regarded as” disabled, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (the “ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12102 (2)(C). Jacques cross-appeals…”
Ahmad Nurriddin v. Charles Bolden (2016)
“§ 705 (20) (B) (cross-referencing 42 U.S.C. § 12102 (1)). Assuming that working is a major life activity, see Adams, 531 F.”
Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm'n v. BNSF Ry. Co. (2018)
“42 U.S.C. § 12102 (1)(C). 5 The ADA currently provides that: An individual meets the requirement of "being regarded as having such an impairment" if the individual establishes that he or she has been subjected to an action prohibited under [the ADA] because of an actual or…”
David Giordano v. City of New York, Howard Safir, Police Commissioner, New York City Police Department, Medical Board, P (2001)
“A The Definition of Disability Under the ADA Title 42 U.S.C. § 12102 (2) defines a disability as: (A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities .”
Kelly v. New York State Office of Mental Health (2016)
“” 42 U.S.C. § 12102 (1); 29 U.S.C. § 705 (20)(B).”
Jakomas v. City of Pittsburgh (2018)
“" 42 U.S.C. § 12102 (1) (emphasis added). A "major life activity" includes "working.”
David Neely v. Benchmark Family Services (2016)
“” 42 U.S.C. § 12102 (1)(A)-(C). Because Neely failed to put forward evidence that would allow any rational trier of fact to conclude he has a disability, he is not “disabled” under the ADA and we affirm the grant of summary judgment on Neely’s discriminatory discharge claims.”
Heidi Hostettler v. College of Wooster (2018)
“" 42 U.S.C. § 12102 (4)(A). That is because the primary concern of the ADA is "whether covered entities have complied with their obligations and whether discrimination has occurred," not whether an individual's impairment is a disability.”
B.C. v. Mount Vernon School District (2016)
“§ 1401 (3)(A), can establish a prima facie case with respect to a claim predicated on the plaintiff having a “disability” under the ADA, 42 U.S.C. §12102 (1), and Section 504, 29 U.”
— 42 U.S.C. § 12102(1) — 12 cases
Irvin v. Versatrim, LLC (2024)
Elias v. Wynn Las Vegas LLC (2024)
— 42 U.S.C. § 12102(1)(A) — 12 cases
— 42 U.S.C. § 12102(1)(C) — 2 cases
Elias v. Wynn Las Vegas LLC (2024)
— 42 U.S.C. § 12102(2) — 22 cases
Pryor v. Trane Company (1998)
Hodson v. Alpine Manor, Inc. (2007)
— 42 U.S.C. § 12102(2)(A) — 14 cases
— 42 U.S.C. § 12102(2)(B) — 5 cases
— 42 U.S.C. § 12102(2)(C) — 1 case
— 42 U.S.C. § 12102(3) — 4 cases
Amos v. Welles (2020)
White v. SKF USA Inc. (2023)
— 42 U.S.C. § 12102(3)(A) — 3 cases
Thomsen v. Stantec, Inc. (2012)
White v. SKF USA Inc. (2023)
Elias v. Wynn Las Vegas LLC (2024)
— 42 U.S.C. § 12102(3)(B) — 4 cases
Love v. Wayfair LLC (2025)
— 42 U.S.C. § 12102(4)(A) — 3 cases
— 42 U.S.C. § 12102(4)(B) — 1 case
— 42 U.S.C. § 12102(4)(D) — 4 cases
— 42 U.S.C. § 12102(4)(E)(ii) — 1 case
Floyd v. Lee (2015)
— 42 U.S.C. § 12102(A) — 1 case
— 42 U.S.C. § 12102(l) — 1 case
— 42 U.S.C. § 12102(l)(c) — 1 case
In Re Application of Henry (2013)
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.