In Michael v City of Troy Police Dept, 808 F3d 304 (CA 6 2015) the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of a former police officer’s Americans with Disabilities Act case where the former officer claimed his employer unlawfully placed him on unpaid leave after he encountered various health issues but numerous medical doctors opined he could return to work. The Sixth Circuit reviewed opinions from other physicians who determined that the former officer was unfit for work and the Court deemed these competing medical opinions “objectively reasonable”; as a result, the Court affirmed the dismissal of the former officer's ADA case. The Sixth Circuit noted that the opinions relied on by the employer had to be "objectively reasonable" when placing the former officer on unpaid leave -- not necessarily "correct."

As pointed out by Justice Gilman in a dissenting opinion, the aforementioned analysis poses the potential risk of “allow[ing] an employer to avoid liability for an adverse employment action simply by seeking the opinion of a doctor known to consistently favor the employer.” The dissent also highlighted that the “objective reasonableness” of a doctor’s opinion is called into question when the record contains evidence clearly contradicting the doctor’s opinions.