This case started with a pair of Skechers, and will end with a jury trial.
A cocktail server at MGM National Harbor, Rebecca Lopez-Duprey, suffered from foot conditions—Achilles tendonitis and Equinus deformity—that made wearing heels painful and medically inadvisable. Her doctor recommended she wear flat, supportive shoes. Eventually, MGM granted her an ADA accommodation to do just that.
Lopez-Duprey wore Skechers-style black shoes for over two years without issue. Then came a policy change.
In late 2021, MGM issued a memo updating the dress code and specifying which shoes were allowed, even for employees with ADA accommodations. Skechers weren't on the approved list. The company disciplined Lopez-Duprey multiple times, including once for showing up to work in her doctor-recommended sneaker. She protested internally, and her doctor even submitted another note, this time stating she needed those shoes permanently.
MGM terminated her shortly thereafter for violating its appearance standards.
Lopez-Duprey sued for failure to accommodate under the ADA.
Last week, the court denied MGM's motion for summary judgment, sending the case to trial. The court found disputed facts on:
👟 Whether MGM appropriately modified or revoked the accommodation;
👟 Whether she followed proper steps to update the request; and
👟 Whether the final doctor's note arrived before or after her termination.
Here's the takeaway for employers: Approving a disability accommodation isn't a one-and-done task. It's a living process. When policies change or medical needs shift, employers must revisit, re-evaluate, and, if needed, adjust the accommodation. That means documenting every step and communicating clearly. The ADA doesn't require perfection. But it does demand effort—a real, ongoing dialogue rooted in good faith that doesn't just pay lip service to the interactive process.
Sometimes it's not about the shoes. It's about the steps you take.