Rosenbaum v. Zorn Compressor & Equipment Inc
2:21-cv-00847
E.D. Wis.Mar 12, 2025Background
- Julie Rosenbaum, the plaintiff, worked for Zorn Compressor & Equipment, Inc. in various departments from 2009 to 2021.
- Rosenbaum alleged disability discrimination under the ADA and age discrimination under the ADEA, focusing on events involving sleep apnea, pulmonary hypertension, and a knee injury.
- During her employment, she received performance complaints, including falling asleep at work and perceived inefficiency, and was eventually terminated as part of a department restructuring.
- Rosenbaum argued, among other things, that her employer failed to accommodate her alleged disabilities and terminated her due to her age and medical conditions.
- The employer filed for summary judgment, asserting Rosenbaum did not establish a valid disability or age discrimination claim, nor did she require reasonable accommodations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| ADA—Failure to Accommodate | Disabilities substantially limited major life activities; defendant failed to accommodate. | No qualifying disability or accommodation requests; reasonable accommodations provided. | No disability established; no failure to accommodate. |
| ADA—Discriminatory Termination | Termination motivated by perceived disabilities. | Termination was for operational efficiency, not disability. | No evidence of disability-based termination. |
| ADEA—Age Discrimination | Terminated because of age, not job performance. | Termination based on restructuring; duties assumed by other protected employees. | No evidence age was a but-for cause; claim fails. |
| Reasonableness of Accommodations | Denied effective accommodations and punished for attendance. | Provided parking, leave for therapy, and job modifications. | Defendant's accommodations were reasonable. |
Key Cases Cited
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242 (summary judgment standard—material factual disputes must be genuine)
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (moving party must show absence of genuine issue of material fact for summary judgment)
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (burden-shifting framework for discrimination claims)
- Brumfield v. City of Chicago, 735 F.3d 619 (reasonable accommodation duty under ADA only for known limitations)
- Kurtzhals v. County of Dunn, 969 F.3d 725 (elements for ADA discrimination claims)
- Carson v. Lake County, Ind., 865 F.3d 526 (ADEA liability requires proof that age was the but-for cause of termination)