Answer to Question 1
Discrimination based on disability
The court granted UPS's motion for summary judgment, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed this judgment. Murphy appealed to the United States Supreme Court, which affirmed the lower court's decision. The Supreme Court applied its holding in Sutton v. United Airlines, Inc., 527 U.S. 471, 119 S.Ct. 219, 144 L.Ed.2d 450 (1999), to conclude that Murphy was not disabled under the ADA. The Court also concluded that Murphy was not regarded as disabled because of his high blood pressure. The Court explained that this would have been the case if UPS mistakenly believed that his actual, nonlimiting impairment substantially limits one or more major life activities, but UPS did not. The employer regarded Murphy as unqualified to work as a UPS mechanic only because he could not be certified under the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) regulation. Did Murphy's inability to obtain DOT certification cause him to be regarded as substantially limited in the major life activity of working? No, reasoned the Court, because under Equal Opportunity Employment Commission regulations, one must be regarded as precluded from more than a particular job. Murphy has shown that he is regarded as unable to perform the job of mechanic only when that job requires driving a commercial motor vehicle. . . . Indeed, it is undisputed that he is generally employable as a mechanic. This was insufficient, as a matter of law, to prove that he is regarded as substantially limited in the major life activity of working.
Answer to Question 2
TRUE