A federal court rejected Denver’s request to dismiss a civil rights lawsuit against the city from a former employee with cerebral palsy who alleges she experienced discrimination and retaliation.

The decision was a procedural victory for Kristen Guadiana, who is seeking back pay and other monetary damages after being terminated as an eligibility technician in the Denver Department of Human Services.

One of the attorneys representing Guadiana at Colorado’s federal district court, Charlotte N. Sweeney, is currently President Joe Biden’s nominee for a judgeship on the same court. The employment discrimination lawyer was among the three candidates recommended to Biden by the state’s U.S. senators, and she is awaiting a hearing before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary.

Guadiana described in her federal complaint that the city hired her in May 2015, and she was responsible for determining people’s eligibility for Medicaid assistance.

Employees in her position were required to complete a certain number of applications per day, but Guadiana’s cerebral palsy precluded the use of her left hand for typing. Allegedly, her supervisor and coworkers noticed she was a fast typist despite the use of only one hand.

Six months after her hiring, Guadiana’s supervisor reportedly told her that her numbers were “a little low” and the city would extend her probation. Afterward, the department explored ways to accommodate Guadiana under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The 1990 federal law requires employers to provide reasonable accommodation to individuals with disabilities so that they can perform the essential functions of their position. According to the Job Accommodation Network, its survey of employers found the majority of workplace accommodations cost nothing to implement, and the median expenditure for those who did incur a one-time cost was $500.

The city reportedly suggested Guadiana receive a one-handed keyboard, voice recognition software or a “short” keyboard with a 10-number keypad. While Guadiana was reportedly on medical leave in early 2016, the short keyboard arrived, but was never installed because it was incompatible with her computer. The department also ended the interactive process of coming up with reasonable means of accommodation for Guadiana.

Guadiana’s supervisor subsequently told her she was not meeting her goals, and assigned her to a call center duties in March. The city terminated Guadiana on April 21, 2016. Although she finally received a compatible short keyboard, Guadiana only had access to it for a week before her firing.

“Defendant discriminated against Plaintiff because of her disability by, among other things…terminating Plaintiff without first evaluating whether Plaintiff’s purported performance issues improved following the use of her approved accommodations; failing to offer Plaintiff additional reasonable accommodations, including transfer to a vacant position for which she was qualified; and otherwise failing to engage in the interactive process in good faith,” Guadiana claimed in her lawsuit.

The city asked the federal court to dismiss the lawsuit, arguing the Department of Human Services actually functioned as part of the state of Colorado. Therefore, it was entitled to immunity.

But in an August 10 order, U.S. Magistrate Judge Scott T. Varholak disagreed with that line of thinking. Because Guadiana said she was hired by the city, followed the city’s policies, and had the city’s human resources and attorney offices involved in her ADA accommodation, Varholak found immunity was not warranted.

Ariel B. DeFazio, an attorney who represents Guadiana along with Sweeney, said she was pleased with the order “not only because it means that Ms. Guadiana’s case can proceed to the merits, but also because it is precedent on which future city employees can rely in pursuing their own disability discrimination and retaliation claims.”

The case is Guadiana v. Denver.