Russell v. Phillips 66 Company
687 F. App'x 748
10th Cir.2017Background
- Steven Russell, a long-time employee, suffered a work-related nervous breakdown in Sept. 2012 and stopped working; Phillips terminated him on Sept. 13, 2013 after he failed to secure another position within the company.
- Russell treated with psychiatrist Dr. McClure (Oct. 2012–Mar. 2014), who diagnosed major depressive disorder and panic disorder and recommended return to work in a different department/position; treatment notes and letters did not identify specific functional restrictions.
- Phillips’ chief medical officer requested clarification of functional limitations; after speaking with Dr. McClure, Phillips concluded Russell had no medical restrictions preventing return to his marine freight auditor role but lacked the non-medical analytical ability needed for that position.
- HR posted Russell’s position, gave him his accrued vacation time (with extensions) to find other roles, and terminated him after unsuccessful applications to six openings.
- Russell sued under the ADA alleging Phillips terminated him without offering a reasonable accommodation (transfer outside the finance department); summary judgment was granted to Phillips and Russell appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Russell has an "actual" disability under ADA §12102(1)(A) | Depression and panic disorder substantially limited sleeping, breathing, and concentrating | Medical evidence did not show a causal link or substantial limitation in the identified major life activities | Held: Russell failed to show a genuine dispute of material fact that he was disabled (no competent causal proof) |
| Whether side effects of medication substantially limited sleeping | Insomnia was caused by an antidepressant (lay affidavit and first treatment note) | Lay testimony insufficient to establish medical causation; treatment notes do not show diagnosis or causal link | Held: Insufficient competent evidence that medication caused a substantial sleep limitation |
| Whether anxiety/depression substantially limited breathing | Shortness of breath during high anxiety episodes shows limitation | No medical evidence tying breathing limitation to depression; plaintiff’s statements insufficient | Held: No competent evidence of substantial limitation in breathing |
| Whether depression caused cognitive limits affecting concentration/math ability | Dr. McClure’s opinion that Russell couldn’t do moderate math/accounting supports concentration/cognitive limitation | Dr. McClure’s statements do not attribute cognitive/math deficits to depression; record lacks medical causation evidence | Held: No record support that depression caused concentration/cognitive limitations; claim fails |
Key Cases Cited
- Felkins v. City of Lakewood, 774 F.3d 647 (10th Cir. 2014) (plaintiff must show impairment causes a substantial limitation in a major life activity)
- Williams v. FedEx Corp. Servs., 849 F.3d 889 (10th Cir. 2017) (standard of review for summary judgment)
- Cardosa v. Calbone, 490 F.3d 1194 (10th Cir. 2007) (nonmoving party must present evidence on elements essential to the case to survive summary judgment)
- Koch v. Koch Indus., Inc., 203 F.3d 1202 (10th Cir. 2000) (failure of proof on an essential element renders other facts immaterial)
- Thomas v. Int’l Bus. Machines, 48 F.3d 478 (10th Cir. 1995) (evidentiary limitations on materials opposing summary judgment)
- United States v. Ibarra-Diaz, 805 F.3d 908 (10th Cir. 2015) (issues not raised in opening brief are waived on appeal)