879 F.3d 838
7th Cir.2018Background
- Ayesha Khan, a Midwestern University medical student, failed three first-year courses (totaling four "failure equivalents") in 2010–2011 but was given a second chance rather than dismissed.
- She repeated and passed those first-year courses but the four failure equivalents remained on her record as relevant under the school’s promotion/dismissal policy.
- In her second year (Block II) Khan began failing multiple courses while pregnant and sought pregnancy-related medical accommodations (leave, extended exam time, quiet room, schedule/rotation changes, and tutoring).
- The school granted some accommodations (leave, some rescheduled exams, a tutor) but denied others; Khan continued to fail pharmacology and two other multi-quarter courses and accrued nine additional failure equivalents, bringing her total to thirteen.
- The Preclinical Promotions Committee dismissed Khan under the school policy (dismissal typically follows three failure equivalents in one year or four over more than one year). Khan sued under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act alleging discrimination and failure to accommodate.
- The district court granted summary judgment for the University; the Seventh Circuit affirmed, holding Khan was not "otherwise qualified" for the program even accepting her version of events.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Khan was "otherwise qualified" under the Rehabilitation Act | Khan argued pregnancy-related disabilities and demeaning comments, plus denied accommodations, led to exclusion; she contends she could have met program requirements with accommodations | Midwestern argued Khan had already accrued disqualifying failure equivalents before pregnancy and before most accommodation requests, so she was not otherwise qualified | Held for defendant: Khan was not otherwise qualified because of preexisting and continued academic failures independent of pregnancy or accommodations |
| Whether denial/partial provision of requested accommodations violated the Act | Khan asserted the University failed to provide reasonable accommodations (extended time, quiet room, adjusted rotations) and that denial contributed to failures | University argued it provided some accommodations and that even with full accommodations Khan still would not have met program requirements given prior failures | Court: did not reach accommodation reasonableness because Khan was unqualified regardless |
| Relevance of allegedly discriminatory comments by faculty/administration | Khan claimed comments (e.g., pregnancy is a "full time job") evidence disparate treatment based on pregnancy/disability | University contended comments are not legally significant where student was academically unqualified irrespective of comments | Court: comments immaterial because Khan lacked the essential element of being "otherwise qualified" |
| Appropriate standard of review for academic dismissal in disability context | Khan sought relief from academic decisions as discriminatory | University emphasized deference to academic judgment and that courts cannot substitute their own academic determinations | Court applied de novo review of summary judgment facts but recognized strong deference to academic judgments and affirmed dismissal as not a substantial departure from academic norms |
Key Cases Cited
- Aguilar v. Gaston-Camara, 861 F.3d 626 (7th Cir. 2017) (standard on taking facts in plaintiff's favor on summary judgment)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (Sup. Ct. 1986) (summary judgment burden-shifting principle)
- Ewing v. Mytinger & Casselberry, Inc., 474 U.S. 214 (Sup. Ct. 1985) (deference to academic judgments)
- Knapp v. Northwestern University, 101 F.3d 473 (7th Cir. 1996) (definition of "otherwise qualified" in academic context)
- Novak v. Bd. of Trs. of S. Ill. Univ., 777 F.3d 966 (7th Cir. 2015) (elements of Rehabilitation Act claim)
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (Sup. Ct. 1973) (burden-shifting framework for discrimination claims)
- Matsushita Elec. Indus. Co. v. Zenith Radio Corp., 475 U.S. 574 (Sup. Ct. 1986) (opposing party must present more than metaphysical doubt to defeat summary judgment)