Bliss v. Morrow Enterprises, Inc., 0:09-cv-03064

Bliss was hired July 7, 2008 as assistant manager at Saavi’s Northtown store; she wore a right-arm cast/brace due to a May 2008 injury.
Her arm injury limited movements; she could not lift heavy objects and suffered pain when lifting small loads; doctors did not impose formal restrictions and she did not request accommodations.
Her January 2009 six-month review was positive, with a pay raise; thereafter her relationship with manager Votaw deteriorated and Bliss raised concerns about overtime.
Bliss filed an EEOC charge in April 2009 alleging disability harassment and discrimination; Saavi denied the charge and terminated Bliss the next day after an employee-discount incident.
Bliss contends she was harassed by coworkers about her arm and that Votaw’s hostility and the termination were linked to her disability and EEOC activity.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Discrimination under ADA/MHRA requires adverse action due to disability	Bliss claims adverse actions were because of her broken arm (disability)	No evidence of a causal link between arm and adverse actions; actions were not material disadvantages	Discrimination claims dismissed as no causal link or actionable adverse action
Hostile work environment tied to disability	Arm-related harassment and hostile conduct affected terms of employment	Most conduct was not severe or pervasive; not tied to disability	Hostile-work-environment claims dismissed; conduct not sufficiently abusive or linked to disability
Retaliation for filing EEOC charge against Bliss	Firing occurred soon after EEOC charge with ongoing conversation suggesting retaliation	Proffered non-retaliatory reason: employee-discount policy violation; evidence of pretext	Genuine issue of material fact exists; retaliation claim survive summary judgment for the firing aspect
Whistleblower claim related to ADA retaliation	Firing in retaliation for reporting a suspected ADA violation	Same elements as ADA retaliation; likely pretext for dismissal	Whistleblower claim denied as preempted except to extent tied to ADA retaliation; still viable portion

McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973) (establishes framework for indirect discrimination claims)
Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (1986) (summary judgment standard; evidence viewed in light most favorable to nonmovant)
Higgins v. Gonzales, 481 F.3d 578 (8th Cir. 2007) (adverse-action framework for discrimination claims)
Burchett v. Target Corp., 340 F.3d 510 (8th Cir. 2003) (application of McDonnell Douglas test in discrimination context)
Finan v. Good Earth Tools, Inc., 565 F.3d 1076 (8th Cir. 2009) (prima facie elements for disability discrimination)
Shaver v. Indep. Stave Co., 350 F.3d 716 (8th Cir. 2003) (civility norms; not a general civility code for harassment claims)
Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc., 510 U.S. 17 (1993) (standard for severe or pervasive harassment in hostile environment claims)
Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (1998) (hostile environment factors for workplace harassment claims)
Cheshewalla v. Rand & Son Constr. Co., 415 F.3d 847 (8th Cir. 2005) (temporal proximity alone insufficient to establish causation; requires more)
Nyrop v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 11, 616 F.3d 728 (8th Cir. 2010) (disability discrimination framework and summary judgment standards)