On August 13, 2025, a federal court in the District of Columbia (D.C.) issued a ruling in Smith v. District of Columbia that should make employers think twice before automatically denying remote work as an accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
The Case:
Ms. Smith, a Superior Court employee, began working remotely during the COVID-19 pandemic due to her breast cancer diagnosis and extensive treatment. Even after remission, she remained medically vulnerable, so she was permitted and continued working remotely. During this time, she consistently earned the highest overall performance reviews. The employer allowed hybrid work (alternating weeks) for employees in Ms. Smith’s position until March 2024, well after the pandemic ended.
In March 2022, when Ms. Smith requested to continue working remotely full-time as an accommodation, the employer denied it—claiming that in-person presence was essential and remote work caused undue hardship. She resigned and sued for failure to accommodate.
The Court’s Take:
The court denied summary judgment for the employer, finding genuine disputes about:
-
Whether remote work was a reasonable accommodation.
-
Whether in-person work was truly essential.
-
Whether remote work created an undue hardship.
Key Facts That Hurt the Employer’s Case for Claiming In-Person Was an Essential Function and Remote Work Was an Undue Hardship:
-
Employees in Ms. Smith’s role worked hybrid through 2024—long after COVID-19 was a concern.
-
Ms. Smith received the highest overall performance ratings while working remotely.
-
Multiple supervisors testified that her remote work caused no disruption—and in-person staff often had little to do.
Takeaways for Employers:
-
Claiming “essential function”? Have clear, consistent evidence, including leadership and legal input that supports the assertion that in-person presence is a requirement for the position.
-
Remote work history matters. If an employee excelled remotely, it’s more difficult to argue that in-person presence is critical.
-
Consider each request individually. Blanket policies won’t cut it under the ADA.
-
Emails are discoverable. Keep internal discussions professional—only attorney-client communications are privileged.
-
Post-COVID caution: Denying remote work as an accommodation in 2025 when it was allowed well into 2024 may not hold up in court.
While this D.C. case isn’t binding in all regions, it’s persuasive—and courts elsewhere may follow its reasoning.
Need help navigating accommodations? Employers Council provides a variety of resources, including this whitepaper, ADA Overview. Training is available on the Americans with Disabilities Act. Members or those interested in becoming members can contact us at info@employerscouncil.org for guidance or to explore membership benefits.
Erika Paulus is an attorney with Employers Council.
#AmericanswithDisabilitiesAct