Managers and the Legal Environment 7th Edition by David Madsen, Constance Bagley

Exercise 8

Kenneth Horgan was diagnosed as HIV positive in 1990 but kept his illness confidential. In February 2001, he began working as a sales manager for Morgan, a linen and uniform rental services company. In January 2008, he was promoted to general manager of the Chicago facility. In July 2009, the company's president and Horgan's supervisor, Timothy Simmons, asked to meet with Horgan for what Simmons called a "social visit." During that meeting, he told Horgan that he was "really worried about him" and demanded to know what was going on with him, telling Horgan that "if there was something medical going on, [he] needed to know."
Although Horgan insisted that nothing was going on that would interfere with his work, Simmons "continued to insist that there was something physical or mental" that was affecting Horgan. At that point, Horgan felt compelled to tell Simmons that he was HIV positive, but he assured Simmons that his condition had no effect on his ability to perform his job duties. Simmons then asked about his prognosis, and Horgan replied that he had been HIV positive for a long time, that his condition was under control, and that he had not yet progressed to AIDS. Simmons then asked "how he could ever perform his job with his HIV positive condition and how he could continue to work with a terminal illness." Simmons also said that "a General Manager needs to be respected by the employees and have the ability to lead" and then added that he "did not know how [Horgan] could lead if employees knew about his condition."
Simmons ended the meeting by telling Horgan that he needed to "recover" and that he should "go on vacation" and "leave the plant immediately." Simmons then discussed the issue with Morgan's owner. The next day Horgan received a copy of an e-mail sent to all general managers and corporate staff indicating that "effective immediately" Horgan was "no longer a member of Morgan []."
Horgan brought suit, claiming that he was terminated because of his disability in violation of the ADA and that Simmons's questioning was an impermissible medical inquiry in violation of the ADA. Who will prevail? [Horgan v. Simmons, 704 F. Supp. 2d 814 (N.D. Ill. 2010).]