Terrence Preddie v. Bartholomew Consolidated Scho
799 F.3d 806
| 7th Cir. | 2015Background
- Preddie, an African‑American fifth‑grade teacher with diabetes, worked for Bartholomew Consolidated School Corporation (BCSC) during 2010–2011 and accrued 23 absences (some for his own diabetes, some to care for his son with sickle cell anemia).
- His principal, Dr. Clancy, criticized his lesson plans and classroom management, and had two conversations implying he could not continue taking time off to care for his son.
- Preddie emailed details about his son’s sickle cell condition; the school acknowledged awareness and told him he could apply for FMLA leave but he never submitted an FMLA application.
- The school gave performance‑related reasons (including attendance affecting student progress) for not renewing his one‑year contract; board voted non‑renewal.
- Preddie sued under Title VII, the ADA, the FMLA, §1981, §1983/§1986 and related statutes; the district court granted summary judgment to BCSC on all claims.
- The Seventh Circuit affirmed on ADA and race claims and BCSC’s late summary‑judgment filing; it reversed and remanded the FMLA interference and retaliation claims as triable issues remained.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| ADA — failure to accommodate | Preddie contends BCSC failed to accommodate his diabetes | BCSC: Preddie never requested an accommodation and his erratic attendance made him unqualified | Summary judgment for BCSC (Preddie not a "qualified individual"; no accommodation request) |
| ADA — retaliation | Non‑renewal was retaliation for exercising ADA rights | BCSC: No protected activity; absences were not an ADA accommodation request | Summary judgment for BCSC (no protected activity; claim fails direct/indirect methods) |
| Title VII / §1981 race discrimination | Preddie alleges non‑renewal was race‑based; comparators were white teachers granted leave | BCSC: Nonrenewal was for performance/attendance; comparators not similarly situated | Summary judgment for BCSC (Preddie failed to show he met expectations or similarly situated comparators) |
| FMLA — interference & retaliation | Preddie says BCSC knew of FMLA‑qualifying reasons and used absences against him and discouraged leave | BCSC: Preddie failed to apply for FMLA despite being told how to do so | Held (Interference & Retaliation): Reversed and remanded — genuine factual disputes about notice, discouragement, and use of leave as a negative factor preclude summary judgment |
| Procedural — late summary‑judgment filing | Preddie argued district court abused discretion in allowing belated filing | BCSC explained misunderstanding of deadline; filing was in good faith | Affirmed — district court did not abuse discretion in allowing late summary‑judgment motion |
Key Cases Cited
- Gerhartz v. Richert, 779 F.3d 682 (7th Cir. 2015) (summary‑judgment facts viewed in favor of nonmovant)
- Jovanovic v. In‑Sink‑Erator Div. of Emerson Elec. Co., 201 F.3d 894 (7th Cir. 2000) (plaintiff generally must request ADA accommodation)
- Nowak v. St. Rita High Sch., 142 F.3d 999 (7th Cir. 1998) (irregular attendance can defeat ADA qualified‑individual status for teachers)
- Cracco v. Vitran Exp., Inc., 559 F.3d 625 (7th Cir. 2009) (elements of FMLA‑interference claim)
- Burnett v. LFW Inc., 472 F.3d 471 (7th Cir. 2006) (employee need not expressly invoke FMLA; notice standard explained)