Zeeshan Shaikh v. Lincoln Memorial University, 608 F. App'x 349

Background

Shaikh, a medical student at Lincoln Memorial University (LMU), disclosed ADHD and dyslexia before matriculation and submitted documentation; LMU initially granted time-and-a-half on exams and a quiet room but no completed accommodation form.
Shaikh stopped attending mid–fall 2009, took a leave, completed an external short program for students with learning disabilities, then reenrolled and repeated first-year courses.
During 2010–11 Shaikh failed two preclinical courses and had failing averages in two others; the Student Progress Committee (SPC) voted to dismiss him.
Shaikh first proposed a decelerated (five-year) curriculum as an accommodation only after his academic failures and SPC meeting; documentary support from a psychologist recommending double time and decreased course load was submitted after dismissal.
Shaikh sued under the ADA and Section 504 alleging LMU failed to provide reasonable accommodations; district court granted summary judgment for LMU, and Shaikh appealed.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Shaikh was "otherwise qualified" with reasonable accommodation	Shaikh says a decelerated curriculum and double time on tests would allow him to meet program requirements	LMU says he waited until after failing courses to request major curricular changes and initial accommodations were provided and unused	Court: Shaikh failed to propose a reasonable accommodation; not otherwise qualified absent one
Whether LMU denied a reasonable accommodation in violation of ADA/Rehab Act	Shaikh argues LMU did not properly consider or follow its accommodation procedures and denied his deceleration request without real study	LMU contends the decelerated plan would require fundamental, burdensome curriculum changes and pose accreditation/administrative issues	Court: Decelerated curriculum was not reasonable as it required substantial modifications; summary judgment for LMU
Whether LMU’s provision of time-and-a-half (vs. double time) was inadequate	Shaikh contends double time was necessary	LMU notes Shaikh received time-and-a-half and frequently did not use all allotted time, undermining claim double time would have helped	Court: No fact issue — Shaikh’s failure to use allotted time showed double time would not necessarily have made him otherwise qualified
Whether failure to follow internal procedures (no form) establishes ADA violation	Shaikh points to LMU’s handbook and argues procedural lapses	LMU replies procedural lapses do not independently establish statutory violation absent discriminatory denial of reasonable accommodation	Court: Procedural deviations do not by themselves show ADA/Section 504 violation; substantive reasonableness governs

Key Cases Cited

Smith v. Ameritech, 129 F.3d 857 (6th Cir.) (standard of review for summary judgment)
City of Wyandotte v. Consol. Rail Corp., 262 F.3d 581 (6th Cir.) (view facts in light most favorable to nonmovant)
Jakubowski v. Christ Hosp., Inc., 627 F.3d 195 (6th Cir.) (plaintiff must propose and prove reasonable accommodation)
Kaltenberger v. Ohio Coll. of Podiatric Med., 162 F.3d 432 (6th Cir.) (student must be otherwise qualified with reasonable accommodation; courts defer to academic judgment)
Sandison v. Mich. High Sch. Athletic Ass'n, 64 F.3d 1026 (6th Cir.) (defining reasonable accommodation in education context)
Southeastern Community College v. Davis, 442 U.S. 397 (U.S. Supreme Court) (institutions need not lower or substantially modify essential requirements)
Halpern v. Wake Forest Univ. Health Scis., 669 F.3d 454 (4th Cir.) (summary judgment may be appropriate when proposed accommodation is not reasonable on its face)
Wynne v. Tufts Univ. Sch. of Med., 976 F.2d 791 (1st Cir.) (student must put school on notice with specific accommodation request)
Regents of Univ. of Mich. v. Ewing, 474 U.S. 214 (U.S. Supreme Court) (courts should respect faculty academic judgment)
U.S. Airways, Inc. v. Barnett, 535 U.S. 391 (U.S. Supreme Court) (reasonableness inquiry and undue hardship principles)
Doherty v. Southern College of Optometry, 862 F.2d 570 (6th Cir.) (federal courts ill-equipped to second-guess curricular judgments)