Weaving v. City of Hillsboro, 2014 WL 3973411 (9th Cir. 2014) Matthew Weaving worked as a police officer for the City of Hillsboro for approximately three years before his employment was terminated due to “severe interpersonal problems” between him and other employees of the police department.  Weaving contended that his interpersonal problems resulted from his attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (“ADHD”) and that his termination violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”).  After the case went to a jury, which found in Weaving’s favor, the City filed a motion for judgment as a matter of law based on insufficient evidence to support the verdict.  The district court denied the City’s motion, but the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed, holding that a jury could not reasonably have concluded that Weaving’s ADHD substantially limited his ability to work or interact with others and, therefore, he was not disabled within the meaning of the ADA.  See also Chubb & Son v. Superior Court, 2014 WL 3919614 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014) (no error in trial court’s permitting parties to disclose to their respective attorneys privileged documents in connection with former in-house counsel’s disability discrimination lawsuit).