State Employee’s Retaliation Claim Barred by Eleventh Amendment
1 min read
Aug 21, 2013
An employee for a State administrative agency sued the agency and various state employees alleging retaliation in response to a prior disability discrimination suit he filed against the same employer. Among other defenses, the employer asserted that as a state agency it was immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment and the doctrine of sovereign immunity. The district court did not rule on the issue but granted summary judgment for the employer on other grounds.
The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals ultimately found that retaliation claims for money damages under Title V of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) are barred by the Eleventh Amendment. The Court reasoned that absent a pattern of discrimination by states against employees who oppose unlawful employment discrimination against the disabled, Congress could not abrogate the states' Eleventh Amendment immunity from Title V claims. Consequently, the employee's claims were dismissed.
This case is significant for government employers in that it recognizes additional protections against employees' ADA claims for retaliation. For more information read Lors v. Dean, No. 12-2955 (8th Cir. August 8, 2013).
Featured Insights

Employment Law Observer
Aug 10, 2026
As Leaves Fall, Leave Requests Rise: Are You Compliant With Chicago’s Expanded Rules?

Press Release
Aug 7, 2026
Daniel McGrath Re-Elected Senior Director of the Federation of Defense & Corporate Counsel

Insights for Insurers Alert
Aug 7, 2026
California Supreme Court Clarifies Pleading Standards for Excess Policy Claims

Press Release
Aug 6, 2026
Charles Townsend Named a Best Mentor Finalist in the 2026 ALM Texas Legal Awards

Webinar
Aug 5, 2026
April Toy Moderates HNBA Webinar on AI in the Practice of Law

Privacy, Cyber & AI Decoded Alert
Aug 5, 2026
2026 AI Compliance: Upcoming Laws Every Organization Needs to Know

Press Release
July 21, 2026 | Updated on August 4, 2026
Three Hinshaw Attorneys Named to the 2026 National Black Lawyers’ Top 40 Under 40 List

Healthcare Alert
Aug 3, 2026
Fixing the Emergency Refill Trap: What California’s AB 1587 Means for Pharmacies

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Jul 30, 2026
Should Text Messages be Considered “Calls” Under the TCPA? The Seventh Circuit Says No

Healthcare Alert
Jul 30, 2026
California Courts Sharply Curtail the MICRA Damages Cap in Nursing Home Litigation

Insights for Insurers Alert
Jul 30, 2026
Analyzing a Couple of Cases Involving Exclusions in D&O Policies

