Elena Mois v. Wynn Las Vegas LLC
16-16102
9th Cir.Oct 6, 2017Background
- Mois was employed by Wynn and suffered a work-related injury; she filed a workers’ compensation claim and sought accommodation for her disability.
- Wynn placed Mois on unpaid leave rather than assigning light-duty work it had previously used for similar situations.
- Mois also worked for a competitor during the period contested by Wynn; Wynn investigated whether that work violated its policies.
- Mois sued claiming violations of the ADA (failure to accommodate), Title VII (national origin discrimination), 42 U.S.C. § 1981, and Nevada common-law retaliatory discharge for filing a workers’ compensation claim.
- The district court granted summary judgment for Wynn; the Ninth Circuit reviewed de novo and issued a mixed ruling: reversing on ADA and Nevada retaliatory discharge claims, affirming on Title VII and § 1981, and affirming dismissal of hostile-work-environment allegations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| ADA — failure to engage in interactive process and reasonable accommodation | Mois: Wynn failed to engage in the interactive process and placing her on unpaid leave was not a reasonable accommodation; light duty was feasible. | Wynn: leaving Mois on unpaid leave was appropriate; undue hardship would have resulted from light-duty assignment. | Reversed: triable issue exists; Wynn did not show it engaged in the interactive process or that light duty was an undue hardship. |
| Nevada retaliatory discharge for filing workers’ compensation claim | Mois: discharge was retaliatory and causally connected to her filing a workers’ compensation claim. | Wynn: termination was justified by concerns about outside employment and policy violations. | Reversed: triable issue whether filing claim was proximate cause of discharge given Wynn’s inadequate investigation. |
| Title VII — national origin discrimination (disparate treatment) | Mois: she was treated less favorably due to national origin. | Wynn: no similarly situated nonprotected employees engaged in the same conduct (filing WC claim and outside employment). | Affirmed: Mois failed to show similarly situated comparators; prima facie case not established. |
| Hostile work environment / harassment severity | Mois: alleged harassment created abusive work environment. | Wynn: incidents were not severe or pervasive enough to alter employment conditions. | Affirmed: record does not raise triable issue that harassment was sufficiently severe or pervasive. |
Key Cases Cited
- E.E.O.C. v. UPS Supply Chain Sols., 620 F.3d 1103 (9th Cir. 2010) (interactive process and accommodation obligations under ADA)
- Zivkovic v. S. Cal. Edison Co., 302 F.3d 1080 (9th Cir. 2002) (requirements for interactive process)
- Barnett v. U.S. Air, Inc., 228 F.3d 1105 (9th Cir. 2000) (employer and employee duties to identify effective accommodations)
- Nunes v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 164 F.3d 1243 (9th Cir. 1999) (unpaid leave can be reasonable accommodation in some circumstances)
- Arizanovska v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 682 F.3d 698 (7th Cir. 2012) (unpaid leave as adverse action in retaliation context)
- MGM Grand Hotel–Reno, Inc. v. Insley, 728 P.2d 821 (Nev. 1986) (Nevada public policy recognizes retaliatory discharge for filing workers’ compensation)
- Allum v. Valley Bank of Nev., 970 P.2d 1062 (Nev. 1998) (proximate cause standard for retaliatory discharge)
- Moran v. Selig, 447 F.3d 748 (9th Cir. 2006) (requirement for similarly situated comparators in discrimination cases)
- Vasquez v. Cnty. of Los Angeles, 349 F.3d 634 (9th Cir. 2003) (standards for determining similarly situated employees)
- Manatt v. Bank of America, N.A., 339 F.3d 792 (9th Cir. 2003) (hostile work environment severity and pervasiveness standard)