958 F. Supp. 2d 913
N.D. Ill.2013Background
- Portillo’s operates 32 Chicagoland fast-food restaurants; Heatherly worked Jan 2009–Jun 2010 as Guest Services and then drive-through; she was reassigned to outside runner duties and to light-duty restrictions after pregnancy; she became pregnant Sept 2009 and took FMLA leave Feb 16, 2010 due to pregnancy complications; after child birth, Portillo’s offered 3 weeks of personal leave but required return by June 3, 2010; Heatherly did not return or contact Portillo’s, and Portillo’s terminated her June 8, 2010; Heatherly filed a charge with IDHR/EEOC and then this federal suit alleging sex discrimination (Count I) and disability discrimination (Count II); Portillo’s moved for summary judgment on both counts and to strike Heatherly’s corrected responsive materials; the court denied the strike motion and granted summary judgment to Portillo’s on both counts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sex discrimination under Title VII via the Pregnancy Discrimination Act | Heatherly unable to prove paid defendant discriminatory motive or pretext | Heatherly failed to perform at the time of termination and violated attendance policy | Count I granted in Portillo’s favor; no prima facie case established |
| Disability discrimination under the ADAAA (indirect method) | Heatherly disabled due to high-risk pregnancy; Portillo’s termination linked to disability | Plaintiff failed to show pretext or a qualifying disability as to termination motive | Count II granted in Portillo’s favor; no triable issue on pretext or disability discrimination |
| Failure to accommodate under the ADAAA | Portillo’s failed to engage in reasonable accommodation for disability | Employer engaged in interactive process and accommodated as reasonable; plaintiff did not prove failure | Count II granted in Portillo’s favor; no failure to accommodate shown |
| Portillo’s Motion to Strike corrected response | Corrected response necessary to cure Rule 56.1 compliance | Corrections substantial and untimely | Denied as moot; strike motion denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- Gates v. Caterpillar, Inc., 513 F.3d 680 (7th Cir. 2008) (relevance of pre-termination performance evidence to prima facie case)
- Serednyj v. Beverly Healthcare, LLC, 656 F.3d 540 (7th Cir. 2011) (McDonnell Douglas burden-shifting framework in retaliation/ discrimination)
- Griffin v. Sisters of Saint Francis, Inc., 489 F.3d 838 (7th Cir. 2007) (pretext inquiry under indirect proof)
- Nawrot v. CPC Int’l, Inc., 277 F.3d 896 (7th Cir. 2002) (pretext framework for ADA/Title VII claims)
- Hoppe v. Lewis University, 692 F.3d 833 (7th Cir. 2012) (interactive-process requirement for accommodations)
- EEOC v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 417 F.3d 789 (7th Cir. 2005) (interactive process and reasonable accommodation standard)
- Beck v. Univ. of Wis. Bd. of Regents, 75 F.3d 1130 (7th Cir. 1996) (employee bears duty to notify employer of disability)
- Cal. Fed. Sav. and Loan Ass’n v. Guerra, 479 U.S. 272 (1987) (pregnancy discrimination constitutes sex discrimination under Title VII)
- Hitchcock v. Angel Corps, Inc., 718 F.3d 733 (7th Cir. 2013) (Pregnancy Discrimination Act scope; disability considerations)