Russom v. 1life Healthcare
Civil Action No. 2021-2868
| D.D.C. | Nov 12, 2021Background
- Russom began working for One Medical in October 2019 and was involved in a serious car accident in March 2020; she took short- and long-term disability leave through August 2020.
- In July 2020 she became caregiver for her mother, who was diagnosed with stage IV cancer; Russom alleges she has PTSD, anxiety, and trauma-related limitations (sleep, concentration, driving).
- After medical clearance in August 2020, Russom requested a part- or full-time telework accommodation and communicated with HR and her supervisor; One Medical provided a form to indicate virtual-work preference.
- She returned to the office briefly in early September, called out one week for caregiving responsibilities, queried her schedule by text on September 10, and was terminated on September 11 for allegedly missing shifts she says were not scheduled.
- Russom sued in D.C. Superior Court under the DCHRA for disability discrimination (Count I), retaliation for requesting an accommodation (Count II), and family-responsibilities discrimination (Count III); One Medical removed the case and moved to dismiss.
- The court dismissed Count I (disability discrimination) for failure to allege employer knowledge of a disability, but allowed Counts II (retaliation) and III (family-responsibilities) to proceed based on pleaded facts and close temporal proximity.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Disability discrimination (Count I) | Russom alleges she was fired because of her disabilities (PTSD, anxiety, trauma). | One Medical argues there is no causal link because it lacked notice/awareness of her disability. | Dismissed: complaint fails to allege employer awareness of an actual disability, so no causal showing. |
| Retaliation for requesting accommodation (Count II) | Russom contends she requested telework as a reasonable accommodation and was fired shortly after. | One Medical says she did not engage in protected activity or show causation. | Allowed to proceed: requesting accommodation is protected; close temporal proximity supports plausible retaliation claim. |
| Family-responsibilities discrimination (Count III) | Russom alleges she was treated adversely and fired because she was caring for her ill mother. | One Medical contends there is no causal link between caregiving and termination. | Allowed to proceed: plaintiff alleged notice of caregiver status and temporal proximity to termination sufficient to survive dismissal. |
| Motion to amend | Russom requested leave to amend if any count dismissed. | One Medical opposed; court cited procedural rules. | Denied: court refused amendment by opposition brief; dismissal of Count I without prejudice only. |
Key Cases Cited
- Turner v. D.C. Office of Human Rights, 243 A.3d 871 (D.C. 2021) (DCHRA disability claims interpreted with ADA/Rehabilitation Act principles)
- Crandall v. Paralyzed Veterans of America, 146 F.3d 894 (D.C. Cir. 1998) (employer must have awareness of the disability for causation)
- Baloch v. Kempthorne, 550 F.3d 1191 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (elements of discrimination: adverse action and causation because of disability)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (2009) (pleading must state a plausible claim)
- Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007) (complaint must raise more than speculative claims)
- Solomon v. Vilsack, 763 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (requesting a reasonable accommodation is protected activity)
- BEG Investments, LLC v. Alberti, 144 F. Supp. 3d 16 (D.D.C. 2015) (close temporal proximity can support an inference of causation at the pleading stage)