Alan Labonte was hired as executive director of the Hutchins & Wheeler law firm in June 1992. In his first year in the position, he created a timekeeping system that saved the firm $13,000 per month, negotiated leases to lower rental payments by

$43,000, lowered client disbursement costs by

$200,000, and reduced overtime costs by $40,000.

The firm’s partners gave him a performance evaluation stating that they were “very satisfied”

with his performance and he received a raise of

$4,600. After about a year, Labonte developed a limp. When he consulted a doctor about the problem, he was informed that he had multiple sclerosis. After his diagnosis, he informed the firm and requested that the partners meet with his doctors to determine what measures could be taken to accommodate his condition. One partner had a brief lunch meeting with one doctor, who suggested that the firm limit the amount of walking that Labonte would be required to do.

The firm made no effort to limit Labonte’s walking, to move his office, or to rearrange his job.

Instead, the firm assigned additional duties to him and pressured himto cancel a personal trip to Florida that he had planned. On one occasion, a partner told him to go home if he was tired, so he wouldn’t wear himself out and become ineffective. In January 1994, the firm terminated Labonte because his condition affected his performance. The firm claimed that his thinking was “not as crisp as it needed to be.” After he was terminated, Labonte applied for, and was granted, disability benefits under the firm’s insurance policy, stating that he was “unable to work long hours in a stressful job” and “needed a flexible work schedule.” He then worked as a consultant and enrolled in a graduate program at a local university.

Labonte brought a claim of disability discrimination against the firmunder both state and federal law. After following the administrative procedures, he filed suit in federal court. The firm argued that Labonte was precluded from bringing suit because he accepted disability benefits.

How should the court rule on his claim? Can he pursue the suit despite accepting disability benefits?

Why should that matter for his claim? Explain your answers. See Labonte v. Hutchins & Wheeler [424 Mass. 813, 678N.E.2d 853 (Mass. Sup. Ct., 1997)].