court has read the briefs understands the core issues i want to begin my argument by pointing out that real issue here is that judge mulcher made at least eight serial inferences in favor of the defendants in this case in the terminating this motion and fourteen of a coke two dollars cannot constitute a an adverse employment action and that no reasonably objective observer would find as a matter of law that such an appointment would amount to an adverse employment action or would be a negative to that coach maybe on this particular point help me with couple of things because it seems to me that the t d retaliation claim is the demotion and the adverse employment action as a sort of work together to see whether  can survive summary judgment so tell me if you would what does an associate coach mean it seems from the record that it's a co head coach but in order for it to be  demotion as you assert is there were there any diminution in benefits is that in the records but there would not diminishing the benefits the pay was going to remain the same  mr parsnip was going to receive the same salary as a co head coach as mr bout's that's the issue with respect to benefits but the authority in the  responsibility was diminished by virtue of the fact that it was no longer singular and it was now shared mutually by all definitions of the coach and that of course is what mr prophet who became assistant coach also said that this was a cock up and in any circumstance when one person has singular authority and singular responsibility for decision making and another person is brought to the same level that is necessarily a reduction a significant reduction in the worrying value of that position and we did an argument or fibrous by by analogy to the family medical leave act if someone had  gone on leave and had been the chief executive officer of a company comes back from leaving the now finds himself as a coach chief executive officer of that company that would be a dverse employment action requires serious and tangible enough to alter the employee's compensation terms conditions or privileges of employment so  responsibilities satisfies that serious intangible need in the effort and every one of those elements because it's disjunct even not conjoin you know every one of the last three elements are substantially in the world of scholastic sports being a head coach head varsity coach is a significant position on er and carries with great weight in the community to within you know hundreds one hundred or so days of the appointment less one hundred and eighty points to be removed from that status is a very significant reduction in that coaches  leaving obviously no ability to singularly maintain the program make the decisions and operate it specially the fact the same time mr parsnip was appointed so were the assistants who had one of whom of course mr rock and at spoken out against mr boss's appointment in june on account of his inability to use his hands to manually write the box in public and school board meeting in front of all the school board members who heard that so combined with the fact that the assistants were aligned with the new coach it certainly had a tremendously let me let me ask you this question as a relates to the reasonable accommodations claim and this one as well because you said he was removed the evidence before us is that he submitted recommendation and there's evidence that the school board at the time or on the day that he informed them that he was going to resign was at the very same time  investigating the installation of a lift what effect does that have on the reasonable accommodations clearly well what is uncontested in the evidence is that mr so you know is this knowledge legally significant reason or significant is because of the other evidence that creates on text in late may or june the evidence is that the superintendent said you know a list that would work having practices on the st floor a coffin in the gym that would work in practice is on the st floor on the cafeteria that would work or having practices of solomon a few miles away where he always had practices for the other school that would work the answers were not well here's the alternative from the district if we can suggest any other accommodation they simply said there aren't going we're not going to any of those things where  any of those things so the issue then becomes you know what was his understand that's all well and good in june and then in august after he makes those accommodation requests then they appoint  then they appoint assistant coach who had spoken out against him on the basis of his disability in a public meeting so when you get to august th you know the fact that he was unaware of any efforts that were never told him that that's only the frosting on the cake that's when we find a moment you're not answering the judge's question which is why is his lack of knowledge is or is like knowledge relevant  sorry it is not relevant not one not saying that's sufficient i'm saying it's relevant it's part of the total context because if you had known if you had known that would certainly be in the districts favor what let's s with the real court going to see after combinations he asked for something that would enable him to do that to that practice and that wasn't forthcoming so you know they don't they're not all stand alone the same evidence supports all theories this is not a situation where the discrimination theory can be separated out fairly from the context of what he needed to deal with his job well let me ask you this in order for you to succeed on your reasonable accommodation claim one of the things you are i think going to have to convince us is that there was an unreasonable the lay in providing the accommodation we know that between may and august it's not wrestling season  has to be an unreasonable delight and i do want to get back to the point about knowledge that judge against brought up we're talking about may to august know it from your standpoint no reasonable accommodation has been made but it's not the seat you know that need access to the gym at this point because he's not doing anything with the with the with the athletes am i wrong about that based on what's in the record i hesitate ever address a judge and say that a judge is wrong about anything but i think the important point is laid out in reply brief page seven we talk about all the things that the advice you mustn't touch does during the summer  we talked about how we had scheduled clinics requested the opportunity schedule clinics during the summer to get a head start on the season and the board you know didn't do that but he needed facilities to accomplish the clinics and that's where they were going to run but we get to the point where there's only sixty seven dollars days from august th until the beginning of wrestling season in two thousand and fourteen and nothing no permanent steps have been taken whatsoever by the distance to go up we do what we disregard the fact that they had made an appointment or whatever the exact fact is for the left the st time that that there's the point but the idea of what is a sufficient interactive process that's mutual so you know the fact is they didn't do a single thing except to point the system what what what are we to do with the and he from from their standpoint and from the record it would appear he initiated the decision to resign and acted on it  first let me say the average has nothing to do with the average action on august th and the demotion so that if that is the motion then we have established that we should go to trial on that issue alone nd the idea that they begin a state of mind the next thing he hears is he's not singular head coach anymore he is now a cockroach and his authority is completely diminished by comparison to his ability to make decisions so on august  minute don't resign you know we're going to try to work this out instead he says here is what you need to write in your resignation letter and please do it right now three times a day you know mr  whatever you want to think encouragement to do what your client said he wanted to do i think that the jury question i think the issue at that point becomes what would a reasonable juror and so a juror is allowed to say that's not good faith especially when your reaction is a celebrate or a reaction and a good you're done you're out now we have to deal with you anymore that is as reasonable conclusion to this whole case according to his perspective only and that's that's a that is not problematic i mean i know you've answered it but well tell us you know the think that your time is your time is is pretty much up but i want to ask you something else related with judge as you're talking about context you're also talking about that this is summertime in a school ok and so i mean i think that's something i suppose that we need to consider it was not teeming with people and  deserving of the record as to whether teams student athletes were even allowed in the school during the summer time what's in the record on the issue the twelve month service to who is using what the sole of these at that particular moment but the school starts right then and it's only sixty seven the start of the wrestling season and you know the entire context would be everything else about it and so that's going to be pretty specific counsel i'm asking you really about what what you complain that he wanted to do clinics is there anything in the record that says he could be i did they say they didn't respond affirmatively that's pretty clear could it could that even have happened it's summertime our student athletes even allowed in the school and that's really what i'm asking is there anything in the record about that i think the presumption there has to be for clinics and also what you saw with the coaching by the other assistants in the course you that's being done you know whether it's done at the school or not i don't think the case the summary judgment motion d turn on whether or not in july and august resting room could have been used by anybody else or by mr bell as i think i don't think there's a record evidence of that we don't rely on all right well counsel we're going to have to move on when we're  pretty far so we'll hear you want rebuttal thank you and we'll hear from your adversary now thank you very much community around my name is brian taylor i'm special counsel to the district as well struck tensile in this case and school district position is how can you argue that's not that's not a definition right now let me set the table for a moment nick saban is the head coach of alabama if the trustees of the university of alabama appointed a coal head coach would that not be a demotion to nick saban let's bring it home your trial counsel if out of the blue they appointed whole trial counsel would that not be diminishing in your responsibilities not necessarily depending upon how we divide up the labors duties of of the of the litigation that may not be at all i mean coach as well as roger pointed out there is no two munition and salary over responsibility if anything the arrangement was such that he would be in charge of the whole program in fact it's arguable that was a promotion in charge of being in charge of the testify to explain what this is the organization structure of high school sports and this is the effect of having an assistant coach co equal with you we have had in fact there was no such evidence presented for a jury consider that a general rely upon mr bell's perception of to mr bell's couldn't couldn't identify the students and as a rd student he admitted that students comments were harassing or creating a hostile environment the rd group a complaint and where the general public again none of these groups  representatives of the agents represented or it's intentional and their opposition has a point we should copy attributed to the district you know the problem is that hawkins who complained about him i get that he's not a supervisor he's not  buddy him up with that with the head coach now well i think the focus is on hiring staff that that's best for the students and getting them a you know a number of qualified even if there's some animosity between mr bell's mr hawkins were just brief and there's a mention on page nine the fact that mr bell's was going to apply to have summer programs there's no accommodation ultimately accommodation and chose for him was one he indicated that had been very successful in the past and that was a chair to chair of that there was a call to the company that yes specifically said work before for him in the past it turned out that chair company could not different facility in the district and we would have looked into it there's no record of that request being made because i think you know i think in jersey my kids played sports and i think you couldn't do things before your relationship how his client went in to resign and immediately the response was put in writing in the repeated it he puts significant weight on that that it was you know celebrated as opposed to something else what is is i think the evidence whether it's written evidence whether it's testimonial evidence will show that we actively engaged in interactive process unfortunately he did have to resign in the day which we rethought we had a final solution and the fact that he didn't get other options he may have mentioned hundreds of tables and chairs to provide that specific combination we were never wired to give every option that was offered in this sense we feel we came from the option that was previously successful for him that you were that he asked for he even gave us the name of the significant extent that the evidence is clear to all the testimonies that were given that he was hired over three or four other people were not disabled we were to nice to his talent and skill to no one's ever disputed that and the fact that we are going to despite this was fully known to all of us  none of those meetings in the district suggest any accommodations themselves a commendation that you're talking about in terms of live with this is just a live mr bell says only prior experience with the lip was not the evidence was that  knew someone who had repaired his chair previously and that was all the step no follow up from the district with respect to whether i want to be clear the clinics were not necessarily for practice purposes for the varsity team they were to  solomon here to establish it was a twelve month a year job and that's what we represented in our brief we're not saying that equates with taking place in the wrestling room at a coffee it was for a different issue the issue too is is if you look back to may th the very st thing that happened that was never ever withdrawn was mr costanza the director of human resources for the district and wrestling volunteer coach said why don't you quit we think you should quit things or change and that's what happened nothing changed from that point forward so it was swimming upstream all the way the idea about the lengthy accommodation just yards i think you're you're you're correct that can't be practices before the league before practice season begins that's true that's not really the argument the idea that no effort was made twar any accommodation for one hundred and eighty dollars days is the issue in context it's not that by itself in isolation that this case is based on it's based not all the other things that happened that's a piece of that's a piece of if the district come back and say oh but look we talk to him we set these things up in june or july and august and we have these ideas and we and these things they never suggested a single solitary accommodation that's just one piece of the overall context of why it was reasonable for him to have done what he did on august t sorry mate thirty two was appointed i may th and mr corsan visit him the very next day and the testimony record is laid out in our brief exactly what was that which is one of my concerns about the court well saying that they were consistent