During the peak of her bout with depression in 1993, Kelleher admits she fell behind on her work. However, she claims in her trial brief that after drug therapy she started to catch up to the backlog and her work was again on time by the beginning of 1995.

In the trial brief, Kelleher claims that Director of Administration for the Department of Economics Laura A. Ervin, one of her supervisors, demanded in March 1996 that Kelleher start working on campus.

Kelleher, who claims her mental condition required her to work at home, alleges that her supervisor's action was discriminatory. She complained to Harvard's Office of the General Counsel and filed a complaint with MCAD after allegedly receiving no response from the University.

In documents submitted to the court, Kelleher titles the period after filing this claim as "the retaliation." Kelleher was informed of the elimination of her job on Aug. 30, 1996 and editing of the journal was turned over to MIT Press.

Kelleher claims she was fired in retribution for her discrimination complaint, but Harvard's attorney disputes the plaintiff's characterization of the case.

"We disagree with a great many of the facts," Ryan said. "The decision to eliminate her job was not influenced in any way but the merits of the working situation."

Recent decisions by the United States Supreme Court may prove relevant to the case. Several rulings made at the end of the court's last term are widely seen as limiting the effect of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act.