Job transfers and disability leave
Royston v. City of Scottsdale
In brief
- Where it stands
- Dismissed
Petition denied.
- What it’s about
- Nichol Royston asks the Supreme Court to review whether the Ninth Circuit wrongly treated her involuntary transfer as harmless because she kept her title, rank, and pay, despite claimed changes to her work conditions.
- Who it affects
- The denial ends Royston's request for Supreme Court review; it does not decide her employment-law claims.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.

What it's about
She also asks whether employers may rely on past or expected disability-related leave, including cancer-related leave, to justify adverse actions without following the ADA’s interactive process or showing undue hardship.
Royston's petition questioned whether keeping her title, rank and pay erased claimed harm from her transfer, and whether employers could rely on disability-related leave without following the ADA's interactive process or showing undue hardship.
Question presented
1. Does the Ninth Circuit decision, which relied on pre-Muldrow opinions, conflict with Muldrow and post Muldrow decisions in other Circuits by finding no actionable employment harm in an involuntary transfer, solely because the employee retained her title, rank, and pay, despite evidence of materially adverse changes to her employment terms and conditions? 2. Whether the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 allow employers to use past protected leave or speculative future leave related to a disability, including cancer, as a legitimate reason for adverse actions without following the ADA ’ s interactive process or showing undue hardship.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
New analysis added
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Show 2 moreShow fewer
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Brief added: Petition
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.