236 F. Supp. 3d 1091
E.D. Wis.2017Background
- Plaintiff Linda Reed, who has tardive dyskinesia (TD) and bipolar disorder, was admitted to Columbia St. Mary’s Hospital’s inpatient behavioral unit in March 2012 after reporting suicidal ideation and stayed four days.
- Reed uses a computer-based speech device (Dynavox); she alleges staff repeatedly denied access to it, denied telephone and chaplain access, refused to show medication records, attempted to prescribe psychotropic medication despite her allergy, and escorted her off premises at discharge.
- A central incident (Mar. 11, 2012): Reed spilled hot coffee, fell and screamed; a patient-care assistant (Miller) and nursing supervisor (Fry) escorted her to a seclusion room for about two hours. Parties dispute whether the act was an overreaction or a nonviolent response to disruptive behavior.
- Columbia’s records and witness testimony document Reed’s loud, agitated, and uncooperative behavior during her stay; staff maintain seclusion was to reduce stimulation and restore safety and order.
- Columbia is part of a multi-entity corporate structure connected to Ascension Health and entities with explicit Catholic mission statements; Columbia’s bylaws reference adherence to Catholic teachings and it was listed in The Official Catholic Directory.
- Procedural posture: Columbia moved for summary judgment seeking dismissal of Reed’s ADA and Rehabilitation Act claims; Reed moved to strike Columbia’s religious-exemption defense as untimely. The court granted summary judgment for Columbia, dismissed federal claims with prejudice, and dismissed state-law claims without prejudice.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Columbia waived its Title III ADA religious-exemption defense by not pleading it in the answer | Reed: Columbia failed to timely plead the affirmative defense and prejudiced her ability to conduct discovery | Columbia: Reed had notice from discovery and depositions that Columbia claimed a religious identity; no prejudice from late formal assertion | No waiver — defense not waived; Reed had notice and opportunity to develop record |
| Whether Columbia qualifies for ADA’s exemption as a religious organization or entity controlled by one | Reed: Columbia’s religious pedigree is disputed; documents are inconsistent and nonsectarian entities exercise power | Columbia: multiple entities in chain are Catholic ministries; bylaws, governance, and official directories show pervasive Catholic control and mission | Columbia falls within Title III’s religious exemption; ADA claims dismissed |
| Whether Reed can prevail on Rehabilitation Act (Section 504) claims requiring discrimination "solely by reason of" disability | Reed: staff acted because of her speech and other disabilities (denials tied to TD) | Columbia: actions were motivated by Reed’s disruptive, uncooperative behavior, not solely by disability; safety and milieu concerns justified responses | Reed failed to show actions were taken solely because of her disability; Rehabilitation Act claims dismissed |
| Whether the court should retain supplemental jurisdiction over state-law Wisconsin Mental Health Act claims after federal claims are dismissed | Reed: no argument advanced to retain jurisdiction | Columbia: asks dismissal of federal claims (implicit request to dismiss state claims if federal dismissed) | Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction and dismisses state-law claims without prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- PGA Tour, Inc. v. Martin, 532 U.S. 661 (Title III prohibits discrimination in places of public accommodation)
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (summary judgment standards; genuine dispute of material fact)
- Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (deference to administrative interpretation)
- Brumfield v. City of Chicago, 735 F.3d 619 (7th Cir.) (Rehabilitation Act does not prohibit adverse actions based on conduct even if conduct is precipitated by disability)
- Lewis v. Humboldt Acquisition Corp., Inc., 681 F.3d 312 (6th Cir.) (distinguishing Rehabilitation Act’s "solely by reason of" from ADA's "because of" causation language)
- School Bd. of Nassau Cnty. v. Arline, 480 U.S. 273 (Rehabilitation Act protects against stereotyping but permits consideration of legitimate health and safety concerns)
- Rose v. Cahee, 727 F. Supp. 2d 728 (E.D. Wis. 2010) (entity controlled by Catholic religious order qualified for ADA religious exemption)
- Marshall v. Sisters of Holy Family of Nazareth, 399 F. Supp. 2d 597 (E.D. Pa. 2005) (parochial institution exempt under religious-exemption analysis)