In the case of Carolyn C. Cleveland v. Policy Management Systems Corporation et al., 1998, the U.S Supreme Court ruled that an individual's application for Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) does not automatically negate their claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Carolyn Cleveland had filed a lawsuit against her former employer, Policy Management Systems Corp., alleging they violated ADA by firing her due to her disability. Simultaneously, she applied for SSDI stating she was unable to work because of her condition. The court held that while both claims might seem contradictory - one asserting inability to work and other claiming discrimination for being fired due to disability - they can coexist as SSDI doesn't consider reasonable accommodations which could enable a disabled person to work whereas ADA does.

In the dissenting opinion for Carolyn C. Cleveland v. Policy Management Systems Corporation et al., Justice Stephen Breyer argued that a claimant should not be automatically barred from pursuing an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) claim simply because they have previously applied for or received Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI). He contended that while SSDI and ADA claims may seem contradictory, there are circumstances where both can coexist legitimately. For instance, a person might qualify for disability benefits but still be able to perform essential job functions with reasonable accommodation under the ADA. Therefore, he believed it was inappropriate to create a legal presumption against such individuals without considering their specific circumstances on a case-by-case basis.