James Davis v. Western Carolina University
695 F. App'x 686
| 4th Cir. | 2017Background
- James Davis, a tenure-track Spanish professor at Western Carolina University (WCU), applied for tenure in 2010 (withdrew) and again in 2011; WCU denied tenure in late 2012.
- Before the tenure decision was final, Davis filed an EEOC charge alleging denial due to depression and related mental-health impairments; he received a right-to-sue notice and filed this ADA suit in 2014.
- WCU documented multiple instances of Davis’s disruptive and threatening conduct: a poem depicting the rape of Dean Ford, a story about killing a faculty member, threats related to the tenure process, derogatory comments to construction workers, and other alarming behavior.
- Several faculty members reported anxiety, sleep loss, fear of coming to work, therapy, and requests to avoid in-person contact with Davis because of his conduct.
- The University Collegial Review Committee and deans cited Davis’s pattern of disruptive behavior and safety concerns as reasons to deny tenure.
- The district court granted summary judgment for WCU; Davis appealed arguing ADA discrimination (but-for causation). The Fourth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether WCU denied tenure in violation of the ADA (disability as but-for cause) | Davis: tenure denial was motivated by disability (depression/mental-impairment) | WCU: denial was based on non-discriminatory reasons — misconduct and safety/collegiality concerns | Held: No ADA liability; evidence shows misconduct, not disability, was the but-for cause |
| Whether mixed-motive liability applies under ADA | Davis: disability was a motivating factor | WCU: even if motivating, conduct-driven reasons dominated; mixed-motive does not create liability under ADA | Held: ADA requires but-for causation; mixed motive does not make employer liable |
| Whether court should second-guess academic judgments in tenure decisions | Davis: university process should be reviewed for discriminatory influence | WCU: courts should defer to subjective/scholarly judgments in academic tenure matters | Held: Court defers to academic judgment where substantial non-discriminatory reasons exist |
| Whether summary judgment was appropriate given the record | Davis: factual disputes precluded summary judgment | WCU: record undisputedly shows misconduct as basis for denial | Held: Summary judgment affirmed — no reasonable jury could find disability was the but-for cause |
Key Cases Cited
- RLM Commc’n v. Tuschen, 831 F.3d 190 (4th Cir.) (standard of review for summary judgment)
- Dreamstreet Invs., Inc. v. MidCountry Bank, 842 F.3d 825 (4th Cir.) (summary judgment appropriateness)
- Gentry v. E. W. Partners Club Mgmt. Co., 816 F.3d 228 (4th Cir.) (ADA requires "but-for" causation)
- Jiminez v. Mary Washington Coll., 57 F.3d 369 (4th Cir.) (deference to academic tenure judgments)
- E.E.O.C. v. Amego, Inc., 110 F.3d 135 (1st Cir.) (caution against courts acting as a "super-tenure committee")
- Villanueva v. Wellesley Coll., 930 F.2d 124 (1st Cir.) (academic employment and tenure review restraint)