591 F. App'x 648
10th Cir.2014Background
- McCulley has Type III spinal muscular atrophy and uses a wheelchair; she was admitted to KUSOM in 2011 but admission was rescinded after staff concluded she could not meet the Motor Technical Standard.
- KUSOM's accreditation requires a Motor Technical Standard: students must perform diagnostic procedures and basic life support.
- McCulley provided accommodation requests in 2012 and underwent an iterative process with KUSOM staff and clinical faculty.
- A physician supplied specific accommodations for each physical requirement; interim Dean Stites concluded the standard could not be met.
- KUSOM rescinded admission in 2012, leading McCulley to sue under the ADA and Rehabilitation Act for compensatory damages and reinstatement.
- The district court granted summary judgment for KUSOM; the court of appeals affirms, holding the requested accommodations would fundamentally alter the program and are not required by law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does providing a staff surrogate alter the program’s fundamental nature? | McCulley argues accommodations would not alter the program. | KUSOM contends staff support would fundamentally alter medical education. | Fundamental alteration; district court affirmed. |
| Are compensatory damages available under §504 given the agency's conduct? | Discrimination was intentional, warranting damages. | KUSOM was not intentionally indifferent and engaged in an accommodation process. | No compensatory damages. |
| Does ADA/Rehabilitation Act require admission or accommodation beyond program standards? | McCulley seeks admission with accommodations. | Accommodations would exceed what the ADA/RA require and would alter the curriculum. | Court affirms district court; admission not required. |
Key Cases Cited
- Se. Cmty. Coll. v. Davis, 442 U.S. 397 (Supreme Court 1979) (staff assistance can be required where it does not fundamentally alter education)
- Fisher v. Okla. Health Care Auth., 335 F.3d 1175 (10th Cir. 2003) (fundamental-alteration standard in education/health-care contexts)
- Powers v. MJB Acquisition Corp., 184 F.3d 1147 (10th Cir. 1999) (intentional discrimination inferred from deliberate indifference)
- Bohn v. Park City Grp., 94 F.3d 1457 (10th Cir. 1996) (summary judgment standard and evidence view for ADA/RA cases)
- Regents of the Univ. of Mich. v. Ewing, 474 U.S. 214 (Supreme Court 1985) (deference to university judgment in academic matters)