Edna Doak v. Jeh Johnson
418 U.S. App. D.C. 375
| D.C. Cir. | 2015Background
- Doak, Coast Guard employee, sought accommodations including telecommuting and adjusted hours; physician documentations supported migraines, depression, thyroid issues.
- Coast Guard granted some accommodations but denied 11:00 a.m. start and telework, citing medical and job-function reasons.
- Doak’s attendance issues persisted; Doak exhausted leave balances and faced disciplinary actions.
- Her supervisors asserted she could not maintain a regular schedule or attend required in-person meetings.
- Coast Guard terminated Doak after prolonged absences; she filed an EEO complaint and then a Rehabilitation Act suit.
- District court granted summary judgment for Coast Guard on accommodation and retaliation claims, and dismissed on jurisdictional exhaustion grounds; on appeal the court addresses jurisdiction, exhaustion, and merits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether failure to timely contact an EEO Counselor deprived jurisdiction | Spinelli is distinguishable; timely exhaustion not jurisdictional | Exhaustion timing limits bar suit | Not jurisdictional; failure can be waived; dismissal reversed on this point |
| Whether Doak's accommodation claims survive summary judgment | Requested flexible hours/telework could be reasonable accommodations | Essential function required in-person meetings; accommodations would not enable performance | Summary judgment for Coast Guard; accommodation failed to show ability to perform essential functions |
| Whether the retaliation claim supports relief | Terminated after requesting accommodations; causal link shown | Non-discriminatory reasons: chronic absences and scheduling issues | Summary judgment upheld for Coast Guard on retaliation claim |
| Whether plaintiff showed genuine dispute on pretext for retaliation | Attendance improving in summer 2010 proves pretext | Attendance never reached required level; no material dispute on pretext | No genuine issue of material fact; Coast Guard entitled to judgment on retaliation claim |
Key Cases Cited
- Spinelli v. Goss, 446 F.3d 159 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (jurisdictional exhaustion not automatically required; final disposition governs—timing rules are non-jurisdictional)
- Bowden v. United States, 106 F.3d 433 (D.C. Cir. 1997) (EEOC time limits are like statutes of limitations; tolling possible)
- Steele v. Schafer, 535 F.3d 689 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (45-day EEOC limit subject to equitable tolling)
- Koch v. White, 744 F.3d 162 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (procedural/exhaustion issues can be excused; not jurisdictional)