528 F. App'x 6
2d Cir.2013Background
- Clifford worked for Rockland County Department of Hospitals for 28 years.
- Clifford had an on-duty intoxication incident on May 13, 2008, leading to discipline.
- The County imposed a disciplinary stipulation including a period of evaluation and restrictions on alcohol use for a year after return.
- Dr. Tuckman evaluated Clifford and recommended she not be immediately returned to work and later re-evaluated.
- The County permitted a return to work with supervision and a change to kitchen duties, viewed as temporary, not a demotion.
- Clifford sued for ADA discrimination and retaliation and for due process under § 1983; the district court granted summary judgment for the County; the Second Circuit affirms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| ADA pretext for discrimination | Clifford argues pretext due to failure to engage in interactive process and stricter alcohol conditions. | County had legitimate accommodation history and banned intoxication; actions were job-related and not pretextual. | No material fact showing pretext; reasons legitimate and not discriminatory. |
| Disciplinary stipulation as discriminatory | Special alcohol condition post-return was discriminatory and not generally imposed. | Special conditions for substance abusers do not violate the ADA and were permissible. | Stipulation non-pretextual; does not establish discrimination. |
| Due process waiver condition | Waiver conditioned on Dr. Tuckman’s conclusion Clifford could perform all essential functions. | Initial Dr. Tuckman report showed high relapse risk, supporting waiver condition. | Waiver satisfied; due process claim defeated. |
Key Cases Cited
- McElwee v. County of Orange, 700 F.3d 635 (2d Cir. 2012) (plaintiff must show a reasonable accommodation exists and is possible)
- Buckley v. Consol. Edison Co. of N.Y., 155 F.3d 150 (2d Cir. 1998) (special conditions for substance abusers may be permissible)
- Townsend v. Benjamin Enters., Inc., 679 F.3d 41 (2d Cir. 2012) (summary judgment de novo review; view record in plaintiff's favor)