13.223.16 Lifting

In Gillen v. Fallon Ambulance Service, Inc., 283 F.3d 11, 22 (1st Cir. 2002), the court held that lifting is a major life activity:

Whether lifting pen to paper or glass to mouth, lifting is an integral part of everyday life and seems to fit comfortably within the parameters set by the Court. We conclude, therefore, that the EEOC appropriately interpreted the statute, see 29 C.F.R. pt. 1630, App. § 1630.2(i), and that lifting is a major life activity.

In Mack v. Great Dane Trailers, 308 F.3d 776 (7th Cir. 2002), the court explained:

   According to EEOC regulations, lifting is a major life activity. 29 C.F.R. pt. 1630.2(i); see also Gillen v. Fallon Ambulance Serv., Inc., 283 F.3d 11, 21 (1st Cir. 2002). Great Dane does not argue otherwise, so we proceed under the assumption that it is. But see Mays v. Principi, 301 F.3d 866, 869 (7th Cir. 2002) (expressing doubt that lifting more than 10 pounds is a major life activity).

Mack, 308 F.3d at 781 n. 1.

In Breitkreutz v. Cambrex Charles City, Inc., 450 F.3d 780, 783 (8th Cir. 2006), the court explained:

   With regard to the activity of lifting, we have noted a restriction on lifting alone is not a major life limitation. See, e.g., Nuzum v. Ozark Auto. Distribs., Inc., 432 F.3d 839, 844-45 (8th Cir. 2005). "[R]ather than viewing lifting as a major life activity in its own right, it is more accurate to say that it is part of a set of basic motor functions that together represent a major life activity." Id. at 845. "[A] limitation on lifting together with limitations on other basic motor functions may create a triable issue of disability if in the aggregate they prevent or severely restrict the plaintiff from doing the set of manual tasks that are of central importance to most people's daily lives." Id. at 847 (citations omitted).