The case centered on Kathia Almeida, a nurse who was diagnosed with Stage IV metastatic cancer to the spine in November 2021 and was unable to return to her physically demanding role on a transplant surgical unit. After receiving short-term and long-term disability benefits, Almeida sought reassignment to remote or administrative positions as a reasonable accommodation.
NYU’s motion for summary judgment was granted on April 24, with the court holding that the hospital engaged in a cooperative dialogue and was not required to reassign Almeida to positions that were either filled, non-existent, or where she failed to respond to interview scheduling.
Judge Cote rejected NYU’s argument that Almeida was judicially estopped from pursuing her claims due to inconsistencies between her Social Security Disability Insurance applications and her litigation position. The court noted a temporal gap between the periods at issue, finding no irreconcilable contradiction given that Almeida’s condition and work capacity changed over time.
On the merits, the court held that NYU was not required to reassign Almeida to a Clinical Coordinator role because the hiring team had already selected another candidate. Similarly, no vacancy existed for a Remote Time-Out Audit position within the relevant department, despite occasional temporary assignments of those tasks.
Regarding a Nurse Care Coordinator role for 9/11 first responders, the court found that while Almeida was interviewed twice, she failed to respond to scheduling emails for a third round. The hiring team’s decision to move forward with another candidate based on Almeida’s lack of responsiveness and the other candidate’s nurse practitioner training was deemed a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason.
The court concluded that NYU’s conduct did not violate the ADA or the New York City Human Rights Law, noting that the hospital accommodated an extended leave and actively searched for alternative roles consistent with Almeida’s medical restrictions.