Skip to main content

Disability and attendance at work

Scroggins v. City of Shreveport

Updated Nov 12, 2026

In brief

Where it stands
Petition Pending

Awaiting an order on the petition

No decision timeline until the Court agrees to hear the case.

What it’s about
Scroggins asks the Supreme Court to review a ruling that she did not qualify under the Americans with Disabilities Act, though she says she had returned to limited-duty work with an accommodation before Shreveport fired her.
What's at stake
For Scroggins, it remains unresolved whether her present ability to work with an accommodation can support her ADA claim despite her earlier absences.

Summary: written with AI from the case record.

What it's about

She argues past absences and predicted attendance should not outweigh her ability to work; review has not been granted.

Scroggins says she had returned to limited-duty work with an accommodation before Shreveport fired her.

The dispute is about how courts assess whether a worker can do the job when the worker has a history of absences and is working under an accommodation.

Question presented

1. Whether, under 42 U. S. C. §12111(8), an employee who has returned to work and is actually performing assigned duties under an existing accommodation may be held unqualified as a matter of law based principally upon historical absenteeism and predictions concerning future attendance, without permitting a factfinder to consider evidence of the employee’s actual work status, reasonable accommodation, and present ability to work. 2. Whether summary judgment conflicts with this Court’s decisions in Tolan v. Cotton,, Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc., and Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., when a court resolves competing inferences concerning qualification, accommodation, attendance, and pretext against the nonmoving employee rather than allowing a jury to resolve genuine disputes of material fact.

What happens next

The Court must decide whether to hear the petition. It was distributed for the Nov. 13, 2026, conference, but that does not guarantee an order or a decision date.

Documents

1

Docket activity

8
  • New analysis added

    Nov 12, 2026 · Court records

  • AI analysis generated: Case Briefing

    Nov 12, 2026 · Generated

  • Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata

    Nov 12, 2026 · Court records

  • Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata

    Nov 12, 2026 · Court records

  • Case data updated: documents, description, proceeding_type

    Oct 28, 2026 · supremecourt.gov

Show 3 more
  • Case data updated: documents, description, document_url, proceeding_type

    Oct 10, 2026 · supremecourt.gov

  • Case data updated: documents, description, document_url, proceeding_type

    Sep 17, 2026 · supremecourt.gov

  • Brief added: Petition

    Sep 17, 2026 · Court records

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.

Checked Nov 12, 2026Methodology

Court records and filings

Reporting and analysis