Ronald Rumsey v. Woodgrain Millwork, Inc. d/b/a Windsor Windows and Doors, Liz Mallaney, and Clay Coppock
20-0135
| Iowa | Jun 25, 2021Background
- Ronald Rumsey, deaf since birth, worked for Woodgrain Millwork (Windsor); in Jan. 2015 he suffered work-related back and shoulder injuries and received company-provided medical care and temporary light-duty work.
- Doctors imposed a permanent 10-lb lifting restriction for his back and temporary sit-down restriction for shoulder recovery; Windsor assigned Rumsey to light-duty tasks (notably "bead-taping") and previously provided interpreters for medical and HR meetings.
- In December 2015 a sit-down restriction was removed from paperwork after a treating surgeon issued an addendum; Rumsey refused to sign the modified restrictions, requested a sign-language interpreter for a meeting with HR leadership, and left; supervisors Mallaney and Coppock recommended termination and HR director Crivaro terminated Rumsey.
- Rumsey sued under the Iowa Civil Rights Act (ICRA) for disability discrimination, failure to accommodate, and retaliation; a jury awarded him damages; defendants appealed, seeking directed verdicts.
- The Iowa Supreme Court held Windsor was entitled to judgment as a matter of law on all claims premised on the sit-down/light-duty accommodation (failure to identify a permanent, vacant job), but reversed and remanded for a new trial limited to Rumsey’s failure-to-accommodate and retaliation claims tied to his request for a sign-language interpreter.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rumsey proved he was a "qualified individual" able to perform the essential functions of a job (discrimination & failure-to-accommodate) | Rumsey: he could perform the Fabricator work (bead-taping) he was doing and Windsor had already accommodated him with light-duty work | Windsor: bead-taping was temporary light-duty, not a permanent vacant position; plaintiff must identify a permanent job he could perform | Held: Judgment for defendants — plaintiff failed to identify a permanent, vacant position; employer not required to convert temporary light-duty into a permanent job |
| Whether requesting a sit-down accommodation was protected and actionable (retaliation & failure-to-accommodate) | Rumsey: request for sit-down was a reasonable accommodation tied to his disability | Windsor: sit-down would require creating a new permanent position (unreasonable) | Held: Directed verdict for defendants — request was not a reasonable accommodation and not protected in this context |
| Claims arising from request for a sign-language interpreter (failure-to-accommodate & retaliation) | Rumsey: interpreter was a reasonable accommodation for an important HR meeting and denial/termination was discriminatory/retaliatory | Windsor: trial evidence conflated interpreter request with the sit-down dispute; same-decision defense may apply; verdict unclear which basis jury relied on | Held: Reversed & remanded — jury instructions/ general verdict prevent knowing whether verdict rested on interpreter claims; new trial limited to interpreter-related failure-to-accommodate and retaliation claims |
| Individual liability of Mallaney and Coppock under ICRA | Rumsey: “any person” language permits holding individuals liable for discrimination/retaliation | Mallaney & Coppock: liability should be limited to supervisors with final decision-making authority; require separate verdict lines | Held: Individuals may be liable if personally involved in and able to effectuate the adverse employment action; liability must be assessed separately on remand (separate verdict lines/instructions) |
Key Cases Cited
- Casey’s Gen. Stores, Inc. v. Blackford, 661 N.W.2d 515 (Iowa 2003) (employee must identify a specific vacant position to prevail on reassignment/accommodation theory)
- Goodpaster v. Schwan’s Home Serv., Inc., 849 N.W.2d 1 (Iowa 2014) (framework for disability discrimination under ICRA; qualified-individual inquiry)
- Schlitzer v. Univ. of Iowa Hosps. & Clinics, 641 N.W.2d 525 (Iowa 2002) (reassignment and qualification analysis for disabled employee)
- Malabarba v. Chicago Trib. Co., 149 F.3d 690 (7th Cir. 1998) (employer not required to convert temporary light-duty into permanent position)
- Fjellestad v. Pizza Hut of Am., Inc., 188 F.3d 944 (8th Cir. 1999) (temporary reassignment cannot be turned into a permanent position; plaintiff must identify an available vacant position)
- Rehrs v. Iams Co., 486 F.3d 353 (8th Cir. 2007) (no duty to create new position to accommodate disability)
- Heisler v. Metropolitan Council, 339 F.3d 622 (8th Cir. 2003) (requesting an accommodation can constitute protected activity for retaliation purposes)
- Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228 (U.S. 1989) (motivating-factor framework referenced for mixed-motive/ same-decision analysis)