Did you know that even temporary impairments like a back injury can qualify as disabilities?

Back in the day, it could be difficult for a plaintiff claiming disability discrimination even to prove that they had a disability.

Before Congress amended the Americans with Disabilities Act in 2008, the Supreme Court held that an impairment must be “permanent or long term” to qualify as a disability.

That all changed with the Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act. Congress changed the definition of “disability” to construe it “in favor of broad coverage of individuals” and “to the maximum extent permitted.” From there, the EEOC interpreted the amendments and the breadth of the definition of disability to include an impairment that is expected to last less than six months, provided it “substantially limits the ability of an individual to perform a major life activity as compared to most people in the general population.”

That all seems relatively straightforward.

Except in 2012, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals decided a case called MacFarlan v. Ivy Hill SNF, LLC, in which it concluded that a temporary non-chronic impairment of short duration is not an ADA disability. But here’s the thing. Although Macfarlan was a 2012 case, it actually applied the pre-ADAAA standard because the relevant impairment and alleged adverse action took place before the effective date of the ADAAA. Therefore, the holding lacks any continuing value, and the temporary nature of an injury is not dispositive of an actual disability.

On Wednesday, the Third Circuit clarified that whether someone with a relatively minor or transitory injury nonetheless has a disability depends on whether his injury “substantially limits” his ability “to perform a major life activity as compared to most people in the general population.” The plaintiff had back pain. The court recognized his testimony that “it hurt to sit, hurt to walk,” and it hurt to “turn left or right.” Additionally, there were several weeks during which the plaintiff had lifting restrictions, and his chiropractor advised him not to bend. That was enough to show that his back pain, though temporary, nonetheless constituted an actual disability because it substantially limited his ability to perform major life activities “as compared to most people in the general population.”

The moral of this story dovetails into what management-side employment lawyers have been telling their clients for many years now: don’t focus as much on whether an individual has a disability — they probably do. Instead, consider what the company can do to reasonably accommodate the individual to enable them to perform the job’s essential function without creating an undue hardship on the business.