Cases
Recognizing Protection For Transgender People Under State Sex And Disability
Discrimination Provisions
Cases Recognizing Protection For
Transgender People Under State Sex Discrimination Provisions
Jette v.
Honey Farms & Millett v. Tutco (Mass. Comm’n Against Discrimination Oct. 10,
2001) (holding that transsexual people are protected by state law prohibitions against sex
and disability discrimination)
Enriquez v.
West Jersey Health Systems, 2001 N.J. Super. LEXIS 283 (N.J. Super. 2001)
(concluding that transsexual people are protected by state law prohibitions against sex
and disability discrimination)
Declaratory
Ruling on Behalf of John/Jane Doe (Conn. Human Rights Comm’n 2000) (relying
on Price Waterhouse, Schwenk, Rosa, and other recent federal court
decisions in holding that the Connecticut state statute prohibiting discrimination on the
basis of sex encompasses discrimination against transgender individuals)
Doe v. Yunits,
2000 WL 33162199, at * 3-4 (Mass. Super. Ct.), aff’d sub nom, Doe v.
Brockton Sch. Comm., No. 2000-J-638 (Mass. App. 2000) (holding that a transgender
student had stated a viable sex discrimination claim under state law). Petition for relief brought by Doe's attorney, Gay and Lesbian
Advocates and Defenders. (pdf file)
Rentos v.
OCE-Office Systems, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19060 (S.D.N.Y. 1996) (refusing to dismiss
transsexual woman’s claim that she had been discriminated against on the basis of sex
in violation of the New York State Human Rights Law and the New York City Human Rights
Law)
Maffei
v. Kolaeton Industry, Inc., 626 N.Y.S. 2d 391 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1995) (holding that
city ordinance prohibiting “gender” discrimination protects transsexuals)
Jette v. Honey Farms & Millett v. Tutco
(Mass. Comm’n Against Discrimination Oct. 10, 2001) (holding that transsexual people
are protected by state law prohibitions against sex and disability discrimination)
Enriquez v.
West Jersey Health Systems, 2001 N.J. Super. LEXIS 283 (N.J. Super. 2001) (concluding
that transsexual people are protected by state law prohibitions against sex and disability
discrimination)
Doe v. Yunits,
2001 WL 664947 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2001) (holding that a transgender student had stated a
viable disability discrimination claim) Petition for relief
brought by Doe's attorney, Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders. (pdf file)
Evans v. Hamburger Hamlet
& Forncrook, 1996 WL 941676 (Chi. Com. Hum. Rel. 1996) (denying
defendant’s motion to dismiss disability claim brought by transsexual plaintiff)
Doe v. Boeing Co.,
6 P.2d 531, 536 (Wash. 1993) (holding that gender dysphoria “is a medically
cognizable condition with a prescribed course of treatment,” but that the plaintiff
(a male-to-female transsexual) had failed to prove that she was discriminated against
because of her transsexualism)
Smith
v. City of Jacksonville Correctional Institution
,
1991 WL 833882 (Fla. Div. Admin. Hrgs. 1991) (holding that an individual with gender
dysphoria is within the disability coverage of the Florida Human Rights Act, as well as
the portions of the Act prohibiting discrimination based on perceived disability)
Jane
Doe v. Electro-Craft Corporation,
No. 87-B-132 (N.H. Sup. Ct. 1988) (holding that transexualism is a disability within the
meaning of the state employment discrimination statute)
