Case ID: f-appx_274/html/0480-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Diana CARTER, Plaintiff, Appellant v. FIRST ENERGY NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY, Defendant, Appellee.
    No. 07-4101.
    United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
    April 23, 2008.
    BEFORE: KENNEDY, MARTIN, Circuit Judges, and HOOD, District Judge.
    
    
      
       The Honorable Joseph M. Hood, Senior United States District Judge * e for the Eastern District of Kentucky, sitting by designation.
    
   PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff-Appellant Diana Carter appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Defendant-Appellee First Energy Nuclear Operating Company on her claims of failure to reasonably accommodate her alleged disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12001, et seq., and the Ohio Civil Rights Act (“OCRA”), Revised Code Chapter 4112, and her claim of retaliation under the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”), 29 U.S.C. § 2601, et seq. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant failed to reasonably accommodate her claimed disability and retaliated against her by placing her on short-term medical leave with full pay and benefits, rather than continuing the accommodation of her choosing. The district court granted summary judgment to Defendant because Plaintiff could not establish that she had suffered an adverse employment action, a required element of both her discrimination and retaliation claims, and Defendant reasonably accommodated Plaintiffs claimed disability by placing her on paid short-term leave.

We have carefully read the parties’ briefs, the applicable law, and the district court’s opinion, and we agree no genuine issues of material fact exist and Defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law on each of Plaintiffs claims. Because the district court’s decision is well-reasoned, we see no reason to embellish upon its opinion. Therefore, we AFFIRM the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Defendant on Plaintiffs ADA, OCRA, and FMLA claims for the reasons stated in the district court’s opinion.