• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

HRMorning

  • FREE RESOURCES
  • PREMIUM CONTENT
  • HR DEEP DIVES
  • PODCASTS
    • VOICES OF HR
    • WOMEN’S LEADERSHIP TODAY
  • LOGIN
  • SIGN UP FREE
  • Employment Law
  • Benefits
  • Recruiting
  • HR Technology
  • Payroll
  • Management
  • Women’s Leadership
  • More
    • Talent Management
    • Performance Management
    • Leadership & Strategy
    • Compensation
    • Policy & Procedures
    • Wellness
    • Staff Departure
    • HR Career & Self-Care
    • Health Care
    • Retirement Plans
  • Employment Law

No Disability? No Problem! Appeals Court Green-Lights ADA Claim for Back Pay

Tom D'Agostino
By: Tom D'Agostino
  • Share on

About the Author

Tom D’Agostino is an attorney and legal editor who has more than 30 years of experience writing about employment law, disability law and education law trends. He earned his B.A. degree from Ramapo College of New Jersey and his J.D. from the Duquesne University School of Law. D’Agostino, who is a member of the Pennsylvania bar, is a past member of the American Bar Association’s Section of Individual Rights and Responsibilities and the Pennsylvania Bar Association’s Legal Services to Persons with Disabilities Committee. He has provided technical assistance in the production of segments for television’s ABC World News and 20/20, and he has been quoted in periodicals including USA Today. He is also a past contributing author of Legal Rights of Persons with Disabilities: An Analysis of Federal Law, which is a comprehensive two-volume treatise addressing the legal rights of people with disabilities. Tom is passionate about baseball and authentic Italian food. When not writing, he enjoys spending time with family.

Show Less
Last Updated: September 22, 2025
4 minute engagement
Back Pay

The cost of violating ADA rules about medical inquiries and exams can get potentially steep. It may include back pay – even if the employee never claimed to have a disability.

That may seem counterintuitive, to say the least – but here’s how it could (and did) play out in real life.

Employee’s Anger Caused Concern

In 1998, John Nawara started working for the Cook County (Illinois) Sheriff’s Office. In 2016, he was working there as a correctional officer.

It’s fair to say that Nawara did not always get along swimmingly with everyone at work. In 2016, he had multiple run-ins with his superior officer, and he also engaged in angry exchanges with an HR manager and an occupational health nurse.

Following those events, the HR manager and occupational nurse decided it was time for Nawara to undergo a fitness-for-duty medical examination.

Employee Placed on Paid Leave

The sheriff placed Nawara on paid leave and told him to sign and submit two medical authorization forms. Nawara refused to do so until he was placed on unpaid leave, finally relenting in August of 2017.

While he was on leave, Nawara sued the county under the ADA. Specifically, he said the employer violated the statute’s rules about medical examinations and inquiries by asking for his medical records and telling him he had to submit to a medical examination.

After the suit was filed, Nawara underwent the examination and was declared fit for duty. He returned to work as a correctional officer in late September of 2017.

A jury delivered good news and bad news for both sides: It decided that the county violated the ADA, but it awarded no damages. Nawara then asked the trial court to award him back pay and to restore his seniority.

The trial court said it could not award back pay because Nawara did not have a disability or perceived disability. However, it granted his request to restore his seniority.

Back Pay Dispute: Both Sides Appeal

Both sides appealed. The county sought to reverse the restoration of seniority, while Nawara argued that he was entitled to back pay.

The appeals court explained that the ADA bans employers from subjecting current employees to medical examinations unless those examinations are “job-related and consistent with business necessity.” (More on that later.)

It further explained that the statutory remedy provisions applicable to ADA claims are borrowed from Title VII, which pre-dates the ADA. Those provisions ban back pay awards if there was no discrimination based on one’s membership in a protected class, such as race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Because those provisions were written before the ADA was passed, they do not specifically mention disability.

The county argued that Nawara could not get back pay because there was no discrimination based on disability. In other words, it said there could be no disability discrimination without a disability, whether the disability was real or perceived.

EEOC Supports Employee on Back Pay Issue

Nawara countered with an argument that the EEOC supported with a brief. He said that a violation of the ADA’s statutory provision addressing medical examinations and inquiries counts as a form of disability discrimination.

The appeals court agreed. As a result, it decided that Nawara could get back pay for a violation of that provision.

The appeals court also rejected the county’s argument that the award of restored seniority should be reversed.

It reversed the lower court’s ruling that back pay was not available, and it remanded the case for further proceedings.

ADA Rules for Medical Exams and Inquiries

When it comes to medical examinations and inquiries, the ADA essentially lays out three sets of rules. One applies before a job offer is made; a second applies once an offer has been extended but before employment begins; and a third applies to current employees.

As a general rule, employers may not make medical inquiries or require applicants to submit to medical exams before a job offer is made. (There is a limited exception that did not apply in this case.)

Once an offer of employment has been extended, employers can ask medical questions and require medical examinations – but only if all entering employees in the same job category are subjected to them.

Finally, current employees can be subjected to medical inquiries and examinations if those inquiries and examinations are “job-related and consistent with business necessity.”

This standard is met when an employer reasonably believes that:

  • The employee’s ability to perform essential job functions will be impaired by a medical condition, or
  • The employee has a medical condition that poses a direct health or safety threat.

In addition, an employer may ask medical questions or require a medical examination in connection with a request for reasonable accommodation – but only if the employee’s disability is not known or obvious. For more detailed information, check out the EEOC’s guidance on medical inquiries and examinations.

Back Pay and Medical Inquiries: Key Takeaways

This case is as much about ADA rules on medical examinations and inquiries as it is about the relief that is available for violations of those rules.

Remember: At the pre-offer stage, medical inquiries and examinations are generally off the table. And before subjecting contingent employees or current employees to medical questions or examinations, make sure you are well within the boundaries of the applicable requirements.

Nawara v. Cook County, No. 22-1393 (7th Cir. 4/1/25).

Filed under
  • Employment Law
  • Share on

Get the HRMorning Newsletter

With HRMorning arriving in your inbox, you will never miss critical stories on labor laws, benefits, retention and onboarding strategies.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form
  • This field is hidden when viewing the form

Free Training & Resources

White Papers

Financial Wellness: A Key Pillar of a Comprehensive Benefits Package

Provided by Multiply

White Papers

10 Questions to Ask Your Background Check Vendors

Provided by Mitratech

Webinars

Top HR Trends and Priorities for 2026

Provided by Paycom

White Papers

The Employer’s Guide to Lowering Healthcare Spend Without Losing Coverage

Provided by Personify Health

SPONSORED CONTENT

HR Technology

sponsored content
The Best AI Software for HR Automation

Courtesy of G-P

Talent Management

sponsored content
Powerful Employee Retention Strategies for 2025: How to Keep Your Best People

Courtesy of PEOPLEGURU

Benefits

Health Care

Wellness

sponsored content
Proven Results: 5 Ways Teladoc Health Chronic Condition Management Transforms HR Outcomes

Courtesy of TELADOC HEALTH

Further Reading

  • Employment Law
Repeated complaints about sexual harassment: Key mistake in response leads to $400K payout

The McDonald Oil Company agreed to pay $400,000 to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit, the EEOC announced in a press release. According ...

  • Employment Law
Contacting Employees on FMLA Leave: Where Should You Draw the Line?

A lawsuit that accuses an employer of pressuring an employee to work while on FMLA leave will proceed following a federal court’s decisio...

  • Employment Law
Trump’s EEOC Changes Explained: What HR Leaders Need to Know

President Trump made significant changes to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) when he returned to the White House.  ...

  • Compensation
  • Employment Law
FMLA Eligibility: Do ‘Bonus Hours’ Count Toward the 1,250?

FMLA eligibility usually looks straightforward: Employees need 1,250 hours of service in the prior 12 months. But the calculation isn’t a...

  • Employment Law
Chamber of Commerce Files Lawsuit to Block $100K Fee on H-1B Visas

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is suing to block the Trump administration’s new $100,000 fee on H-1B visas, arguing it would drive up labor...

  • Employment Law
Texas Court Dismantles EEOC Harassment Guidance on Trans Protections

A federal district court in Texas has struck down portions of the EEOC’s harassment guidance, ruling that the agency overstepped its auth...

Get the latest from HRMorning in your inbox PLUS immediately access 10 FREE HR guides.

I WANT MY FREE GUIDES
HR Morning Logo
  • Facebook
  • Linked In
  • ABOUT HRMORNING
  • ADVERTISE WITH US
  • WRITE FOR US
  • CONTACT
  • Employment Law
  • Benefits
  • Recruiting
  • Talent Management
  • Performance Management
  • HR Technology
  • Leadership & Strategy
  • Compensation
  • Policy & Procedures
  • Wellness
  • Staff Departure
  • HR Career & Self-Care
  • Health Care
  • Retirement Plans
  • DEI

HRMorning, part of the Rover Insights Network, provides the latest HR and employment law news for HR professionals in the trenches of small-to-medium-sized businesses. Rather than simply regurgitating the day's headlines, HRMorning delivers actionable insights, helping HR execs understand what HR trends mean to their business.

Powered By Rover Insights
Privacy Policy | Terms of Service
Copyright© 2026 Rover Insights
HRMorning Logo

WELCOME BACK!

Enter your username and password below to log in

Forget Your Username or Password?

Reset Password

Lost your password? Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email.

Log In

Why do we need your credit card for a free trial?

We ask for your credit card to allow your subscription to continue should you decide to keep your membership beyond the free trial period.  This prevents any interruption of content access.

Your card will not be charged at any point during your 21 day free trial
and you may cancel at any time during your free trial.

During your free trial, you can cancel at any time with a single click on your “Account” page.  It’s that easy.