2009 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 11-10-2009 

# S u s an C a s t ell ani v

. B ucks C ty M

un P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 08-3838

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2009 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " S us an C as t e ll ani v

. B uck s C ty M

un" (2009). 2009 D e cisio n s . P ape r 274. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009/274NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

N o. 08- 3838

S U S A N C A S T E L L A N I, A ppel l ant

v. BU CK S CO UNT Y M UNI CI P AL I T Y; CA RMEN T HOME; RA CH AE L CH E RR Y;

M E RE DI T H DOL AN O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt f o r th e E a ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia ( D . C . C i vi l N o. 2- 07- cv- 01198) D istric t Ju d g e : H o n . Ja n E . D u b o is

Subm i t t ed U nderT hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

O ct ober30, 2009 B efor e: SL O V I T E R , FU E N T E S and H A R D I M A N , C i r cui tJ udges

( Fi l ed: N ovember10, 2009)

OP I NI ON2

SL O V I T E R , C i r cui tJ udge. S u san C astell an i app ea ls from an o rde r of the D istri ct C o u rtg ran ti n g su m m ary j udgm entt o t he def

endant s on C as t el l ani ’ s cl ai m thats he w as unl aw ful l yt erm i nat ed fr om h e r e m p lo ym e n t w ith B u c k s C o u n tyM u n icip a lityin v io latio n o f th e A m e ric a n s w ith D is a b iliti e s A c t ( “ A D A ” ), 4 2 U .S .C . § 1 2 1 0 1 , et s eq. , and the Penns y l vani a H um an R el at i ons A ct( “PH R A ”) , 43 Pa. C ons . St at . A nn. §§ 951- 963. Forthe r eas ons that f o l l o w, we wi l l a f

f i r m. I. C a s te lla n i b e g a n e m p lo ym e n t a s a 9 1 1 d is p a tc h e r f o r t h e C o u n ty o n J u n e 1 7 , 2 0 0 2 . O n Sept ember16, 2004, C as t el l ani s uffe r ed a hypogl y cemi c r eac t i on atw or k and w as di agnos ed w i t h i ns ul i n r es i s t ant( T ype I I ) di abet es . Shor t l yther eaf t er , C as t el l ani began a per i od of l eave undert he Fami l yM edi cal L eave A ct( “FM L A ”) . C as t el l ani r emai ned on l eave t hr ough M ar ch 20, 2005, w hen s he exha us t ed hert ot al l eave al l ow ance underthe FM L A and heruni on contr act . She di d notr eturn t o w or k t her eaf t er , nordi d s he pr ovi de a n e x p l a n a t i o n w h y. O n M ar ch 21, 2005, R acha el C herr y , a C ount yH um an R es our ce e m pl oy ee, s ent C as t el l ani a l et t ers t at i ng t hats he mustr eturn t o w or k byFr i day , M ar ch 25, 2005 w i t h a doct or ’ s not e and s ubm i tr eques t ed ac comm odat i ons i n w r i t i ng befor ehand, orher em p loym en t w o u ld b e term inated . A fter C astell an i r esp o n d ed b ylet ter requ esti n g m o re tim e a n d a n “ in te ra c tiv e p ro c e s s [ ,]” th e C o u n ty ex te n d e d th is d e a d lin e to A p ri l 1 , 2 0 0 5 .3

O n A pr i l 4, 2005, C arm en Thom e, D i r ect orof H um an R es our ces forthe C ount y , s ent C a s te lla n i a f

o rm a l n o tic e o f

te rm in a tio n a f

te r n o t r e c e iv in g th e re q u e s te d in f o rm a tio n . T he C ount ys t at ed thatC as t el l ani w as nott erm i nat ed forper form ance i s s ues , butfor fai l i ng t o r etur n t o w or k aft erexhaus t i ng herl eave . O n A pr i l 8, 2005, t he C ount yr ece i ved a l et t erfr om C as t el l ani ’ s phy s i ci an, author i zi ng hert o r etur n t o w or k w i t h cert ai n r es t r i ct i ons . D efe ndant s t ook no act i on aft err ece i vi ng t hi s l et t er . C as t el l ani fi l ed a gr i evanc e thr ough heruni on and w as r ehi r ed byt he C ount yas a perm i tcl erk on A ugus t8, 2005. A s r el evanther e, C as t el l ani l at erfi l ed a compl ai ntagai ns tt he C ount yand empl oy ees T hom e, C herr y , and M er edi t h D ol an al l egi ng, i nt eral i a, cl ai m s undert he A D A and the PH R A . T he D i s t r i ctC our tgr ant ed s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t f

o r t h e C o u n ty an d its e m p lo y e e s o n th o s e c o u n ts .

II. Th e Di s t r i c tCo u r th a d j u r i s d i c t i o n o v e rCa s t e l l a n i ’ s c l a i ms p u r s u a n tt o 2 8 U. S . C. § 1331 and 28 U . S. C . § 1367. T hi s cour thas j ur i s di ct i on under28 U . S. C . § 1291. T he st and ard of revi ew for a dis t ri ctcou rt ’s grantof sum m aryj ud gm ent i s de novo . CAT I nt er net Ser vs . I nc. v. P r ovi dence W

as h. I ns . C o. , 3 3 3 F .3 d 1 3 8 , 1 4 1 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 3 ). A cour tm aygr ants um m aryj udgm enti f, dr aw i ng al l i nfer ence s i n favorof the nonmovi ng p a rty , “th e p lea d in g s, th e d isc o v e rya n d d isc lo su re m a ter ials o n f ile, a n d a n ya f

f id a v its s how t hatt her e i s no genui ne i s s ue as t o anym at er i al fac tand thatthe movanti s ent i t l ed to jud g m en t as a m att er o f law . ” F ed . R . C iv. P. 56 (c).4 III . 

### Ca s t e l l ania l l e ge s that

the County

and i t s e m

pl oye e s vi ol at e d the ADA and PHRA by fa i l i ng t o e nga ge i n an i nt e r a c t i ve pr oc e s s t o pr ovi de r e a s onabl e a c c omm odat i ons and b y termin atin g h er inretaliatio nf o r requ estin g th ese actio n s. We wi l l c o n s i d e rth e ADA an d P H R A claim s sim u lt an eo u sly , b ec au se th e A cts serv e the sam e g o als an d are in te rp re te d c o e x te n s iv e ly. Kel l y v. D r exe lU

ni v. , 9 4 F . 3 d 1 0 2 , 1 0 5 (3d C ir . 1 9 9 6 ). T o pr evai l undert he A D A , an empl oy ee musts how “thats he 1) has a di s abi l i t y , 2) i s a qual i fi ed i ndi vi dual , and 3) has s uffe r ed an a dver s e empl oym entact i on beca us e of t hatdi s abi l i t y . ” Turne rv. Hers hey Chocol at e U SA , 440 F. 3d 604, 611 ( 3d C i r . 2006) ( i nt ernal quot at i on om i t t ed) . Forpurpos es of thi s appea l , w e w i l l as s um e thatC as t el l ani i s d i s a b l e d f

r o m T yp e I I d i a b e t e s a n d h a s s u f f e r e d a n a d v e r s e e mp l o yme n ta c t i o n . An empl oy ee i s a qual i fi ed i ndi vi dual i f s he 1) “has the r equi s i t e s ki l l , exper i ence , educa t i on and otherj ob- r el at ed r equi r ement s ” and 2) “w i t h orw i t houtr eas onabl e ac comm odat i on, can pe r form t he es s ent i al funct i ons of thatpos i t i on. ” Turne r , 440 F. 3d at612 ( ci t i ng 29 C . F. R . § 1630. 2( n) ) . C as t el l ani ’ s s ki l l s ar e noti n di s put e. W e have hel d t hatempl oy er s and empl oy ees “have a dutyt o as s i s ti n t he s ear ch for a r eas onabl e ac comm odat i on and t o acti n good fai t h. ” T a y lo r v . P h o e n ixv ill e Sc h . D ist. , 1 8 4 F .3 d 2 9 6 , 3 1 2 (3 d C ir. 1 9 9 9 ). In o rd e r to sh o w th a t an e m p lo y e r h a s b re a c h e d its d u tyto e n g a g e in th e in ter a c tiv e a c c o m m o d a tio n p ro c e ss , the e m p lo y e e m u st d e m o n stra te t hat“the empl oy erknew of the di s abi l i t y , ” that“the empl oy ee r eques t ed5

acc om m odat i ons , ” that“the empl oy erdi d notm ake a good fai t h eff or tt o as s i s t , ” and that “the empl oy ee c oul d have be en r eas onabl yacc om m odat ed butforempl oy er ’ s l ack of good fai t h. ” I

d. at319- 20. I f the empl oy ee c annotbe r eas onabl yacc om m odat ed i n her pr evi ous pos i t i on, s he musti dent i fyanotherpos i t i on thati s vaca ntand funde d, ator b e lo w h e r l e v e l, f

o r w h ic h s h e is q u a lif

ie d to p e rf

o rm th e e s s e n tia l f

u n c tio n s . W

i l l i am s v. P h ila d e lp h ia H

o u sin gA u th . P o lice D e

p t. , 3 8 0 F .3 d 7 5 1 , 7 7 0 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 4 ). A n e m p lo y e e n e e d n o t id e n tifya n o p e n p o sitio n b e f o re th e e m p lo y e r’s d u tyto e n g a g e in th e in te ra c tiv e p ro c e s s a tta c h e s . Mengui ne v. R unyon , 114 F. 3d 415, 420- 21 ( 3d C i r . 1997) . B uti f, aft eran oppor tuni t yfordi s covery , the empl oy ee s t i l l has not iden ti fied a p o sit ion into w h ich s h e c o u ld h av e tran sfe rred , the c o u rtm u st gran t sum m ary ju d g m e n t in f

a v o r o f th e d e f e n d a n t. Shapi r o v. Tw

p. of Lakew ood , 292 F. 3d 356, 360 ( 3d C ir . 2 0 0 2 ). B o th p a rt ie s a g re e C a s te lla n i c o u ld n o t r e tu rn to h e r p o s t a s a 9 1 1 d is p a tc h e r. H ow ever , aft ert aki ng di s covery , C as t el l ani fai l ed t o pr oduce a nyevi dence thata pos i t i on s he w as qual i fi ed t o per form w as avai l abl e as of hert erm i nat i on on A pr i l 4, 2005, i ncl udi ng t he cl erk pos i t i on s he curr ent l yhol ds . T hus , the D i s t r i ctC our tpr oper l ygr ant ed s u mma r yj u d g me n to n h e rr e a s o n a b l e a c c o mmo d a t i o n c l a i m. I n addi t i on, t he D i s t r i ctC our tdi d noterri n gr ant i ng s um m aryj udgm enton C as t el l ani ’ s r et al i at i on cl ai m . T o s t at e a c l ai m forr et al i at i on underthe A D A , an em ploy ee m ustshow 1) she eng aged i n a p rot ect ed acti vity ; 2) the em ploy er t oo k ad verse6

a c tio n ; a n d 3 ) a c a u s a l c o n n e c tio n . Fogl em an v. Mer cy H os p. , 283 F. 3d 561, 567- 68 ( 3d C i r . 2002) ( ci t i ng Kr ous e v. A m er i can St er i l iz erC o. , 1 2 6 F .3 d 4 9 4 , 5 0 0 (3 d C ir . 1 9 9 7 )) . I f an e m pl oy ee e s t abl i s hes a pr i m a fa ci e ca s e, the empl oy erm us tgi ve a l egi t i m at e, nond is c ri m in a to ry re a s o n f

o r t h e te rm in a tio n . Krouse , 126 F. 3d at500. T he bur den then s h if ts to th e e m p lo y e e to s h o w th a t th e e m p lo y e r’ s re a s o n is p re te x t. Id . a t5 0 1 . An em ploy ee m ayrel yon dir ectevidence o r ci rcum st anti al evidence such as “w eakn esses , im p laus ibil it ies, inco n sist en cies, i n co h ere n cies, or co n tr ad ict ion s” in the e m p loy er’s e x p la n a tio n . Shanerv. Synthes , 204 F. 3d 494, 503 ( 3d C i r . 2000) ( quot i ng Fuent es v. P e rs k ie , 3 2 F . 3 d 7 5 9 , 7 6 4 -65 (3d C ir . 1 9 9 4 )). H ere, t he C ou ntyand i t s em ploy ees st at ed thatC ast el l ani w as t erm i nated becau se s he fa i l ed t o r etur n t o w or k w i t h t he appr opr i at e medi cal document at i on. T hus , the bur den s hi ft ed t o C as t el l ani t o s how thi s expl anat i on w as pr et ext . C as t el l ani has not m ade s uch a s how i ng. I V. F o r th e a b o v e-stated rea so n s, w e w il l aff irm the ju d g m en t of

the D istri ct C o u rt g ra n tin g su m m a ryju d g m e n t.