483 F. App'x 197
6th Cir.2012Background
- Allen suffered from depression since 2002; condition worsened in early 2008, requiring time off and medical evaluation.
- BellSouth/AT&T denied Allen’s request for time off and disability benefits in 2008; disability claim analyzed under short-term disability plan.
- Treating physicians recommended continued leave; Dr. Fry and Dr. Lancaster evaluated depression as severe; Dr. Van Orden found impairment but limited regarding daily functioning.
- Disability Service Center denied benefits citing lack of clearly substantiated impairment; Allen appealed and was denied; she eventually retired.
- Allen filed a lawsuit asserting ADA and Tennessee Human Rights Act claims; district court held she was not disabled; this appeal concerns the ADA claim.
- Additional ERISA case related to disability benefits was adjudicated separately; focus here is on alleged failure to provide accommodations under the ADA.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Allen was disabled under the ADA at the time of the discriminatory act | Allen's depression substantially limited major life activities. | Allen's depression was not a disability under Sutton/Toyota because it was not permanent/long-term. | No; depression did not meet disability standard at that time. |
| Whether post-denial improvement defeats disability status for purposes of ADA coverage | Evidence of later improvement should not erase disability at the time of denial. | Disability must be present at the time of the act; improvement post-denial is relevant. | Post-denial improvement does not establish disability at the time of the act; still not disabled. |
| Whether the Amended ADA Act retroactively applies to pre-Act discriminatory acts | Amendments broaden disability definition and should apply. | Amendments do not retroactively apply. | Amendments do not apply retroactively; the pre-Act standard applied. |
| Whether Allen’s request for paid leave constituted a reasonable accommodation | Seeking time off under Short Term Disability was a reasonable accommodation. | Open-ended, indefinite leave requests are not reasonable accommodations. | Open-ended requests for leave are not reasonable accommodations; no denial shown. |
Key Cases Cited
- Sutton v. United Air Lines, Inc., 527 U.S. 471 (1999) (disability requires substantial limitation even with corrective measures)
- Toyota Motor Mfg., Kentucky, Inc. v. Williams, 534 U.S. 184 (2002) (impairment must be permanent or long-term to qualify as disability)
- Swanson v. University of Cincinnati, 268 F.3d 307 (6th Cir. 2001) (depression may not be disabling if improved with treatment)
- Kocsis v. Multi-Care Management, Inc., 97 F.3d 876 (6th Cir. 1996) (plaintiff must show disability at time of discriminatory act; post facts limited)
- Roush v. Weastec, Inc., 96 F.3d 840 (6th Cir. 1996) (temporary impairment does not establish current disability)
- Monette v. Elec. Data Sys. Corp., 90 F.3d 1173 (6th Cir. 1996) (reasonable accommodation not shown by indefinite leave request)
- Kleiber v. Honda of Am. Mfg., Inc., 485 F.3d 862 (6th Cir. 2007) (discrimination requires failure to provide a reasonable accommodation)
- Donald v. Sybra, Inc., 667 F.3d 757 (6th Cir. 2012) (Amendments Act not retroactive to pre-Act discrimination)