Neither controlled epilepsy nor perceived emotional instability is ADA disability
September 30, 2003In Brunke v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. (8th Cir. 9/29/03), the court affirmed summary judgment for the employer because the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case, lacking evidence of an actual or perceived disability.
He attempted to establish an actual disability based on a diagnosis of epilepsy. But while earlier he had been transferred to a different position due to seizures at work, by the time of his termination he had been returned to his regular job based on medical advice his condition was under control.
In evaluating his claim of actual disability, the court looked at the situation as of the time he was terminated, finding the condition was under control and not substantially limiting his work activities. There was no evidence it substantially limited major life activities outside the workplace.
With respect to the perceived disability claim, the plaintiff had been terminated for repeated confrontations and altercations with coworkers and supervisors over several years. He was terminated only after two staff physicians advised they knew of no reason the epilepsy would cause such misconduct.
The plaintiff claimed he was discharged on the basis of the perceived disability of “substantially limiting emotional instability.” The court cited 29 CFR app. 1630.2(h) for the proposition that the ADA definition of impairment “does not include common personality traits such as poor judgment or quick temper where these are not symptoms of a mental or psychological disorder.”
The court also stated “when there is no medical evidence of a mental or psychological disorder, . . . an employee does not establish a prima facie case of ADA ‘regarded-as’ disability simply because he or she was disciplined or discharged for failure to get along with co-workers or supervisors.”
There was no evidence of such a disorder, so the court found the mere fact the plaintiff was disciplined for such reasons insufficient to establish a perceived disability.
The court also was not persuaded by evidence the company told the plaintiff to seek professional anger-control assistance after one confrontation. “‘Employers need to be able to use reasonable means to ascertain the cause of troubling behavior without exposing themselves to ADA claims. . . .’ Cody v. CIGNA Healthcare of St. Louis. Inc., 139 F.3d 595,599 (8th Cir. 1998).”
Epilepsy is a prime example of the need to examine each potential ADA claim individually and not attempt to generalize based on the diagnosis. This case does not mean epilepsy can never be a disability. It is likely that there are people for whom it substantially limits major life activities. But there are also many cases of people, like the plaintiff in this case, whose epilepsy is so well-controlled by medication that it is not substantially limiting.
The alleged emotional instability is an interesting claim. The outcome might have been different had there been medical evidence connecting the behavior to a mental or psychological disorder.
The employer was therefore well advised to consult physicians about whether the epilepsy could cause the misconduct. If it could have been, the employer may still have been able to take action to prevent further workplace incidents, but possible reasonable accommodation might have been an issue.
Related Posts
ADHD not ADA-protected disability, First Circuit holds
Fourth Circuit uses prima facie case to dispose of…
Follow-up on epilepsy as disability
Stick Out Your Tongue and Say: "Uh!" What Constitutes A "Medical Examination" Under ADA?
Seventh Circuit deals with ADA and FMLA in case of…
No Comments »
No comments yet.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
If you want to leave a feedback to this post or to some other user´s comment, simply fill out the form below.