2005 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 8-19-2005 

# D ouri s v . B ucks 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 . 05-1362

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_2005

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 2005 D e c i sion s b y an authori 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 " D ouri s v . B uck s " (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 675. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/675DP S - 2 8 1 NOT 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. 05- 1362

_____________ J A M ES G EO RG E D O U RI S, A ppel l ant

v. BU CK S CO UNT Y; BU CK S CO UNT Y OF F I CE OF T HE DI S T RI CT AT T OR NE Y; DI AN E E. GI BBO NS; BU CK S COU NTY OFFI CE H UM AN RESOU RCE; CA RM EN G . T H O ME ; D O Y L E S T O WN B O R O U G H I N C . ; MA Y O R D O Y L E S T O WN BO RO U G H I N C. ; M O N TG O M ER Y M CC RA CK EN W A LK ER & RH O A D S; B A L L A R D S P A H R A N D R E W S & IN G E R S O L L ; F R A N K A . C H E R N A K ; A R L E N E J. A N G E L O , A ll su e d in d iv id u a llya n d in th e ir o f f icia l ca p a c ity , h e ld jo in tlya n d se v e ra lly liab le

______________________ O n A p p ea l Fro m 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 ( E . D . Pa. C i v. N o. 04- cv- 00232) D i s tr i ctJ udge: H onor abl e R . B ar cl aySur r i ck

________________________ S u b mi t t e d F o rP o s s i b l e Di s mi s s a l Un d e r2 8 U. S . C. § 1 9 1 5 ( e ) ( 2 ) ( B) J une 16, 2005 Be f o r e : RO TH, BA RRY AN D SM I TH, CI RCU I T J UD GES

( Fi l ed A ugus t19, 2005)

__________________ OP I NI ON

__________________D our i s has fi l ed numer ous l aw s ui t s agai ns tB ucks C ountyr ai s i ng di s cr i m i nat i on 1 cl ai m s. 2 P ER CURI AM J ames D our i s , pr ocee di ng pr o s e, appea l s an or derof the U ni t ed St at es D i s tr i ct C our tforthe East ern D i s tr i ctof Penns y l vani a di s m i s s i ng hi s di s abi l i tydi s cr i m i nat i on ac ti o n . W e w il l dism iss th is ap p ea l pu rsua n t t o 2 8 U . S . C . § 1 9 1 5 (e)(2)(B ). D our i s al l eges thathe ca l l ed the B ucks C ountyO ffi ce of H um an R es our ces and r eques t ed an e m pl oym entappl i cat i on foran A ccount i ng A s s i s t antpos i t i on. A B ucks C o u n ty em p lo y e e a s k e d h im w h yh e n e e d e d th e a p p lic a tio n s e n t to h im in th e m a il. A ppr oxi m at el ytw o m onths l at er , havi ng notr ece i ved an a ppl i cat i on, D our i s w entt o the o f f ice . D o u ris a lleg e s th e H u m a n R e so u rc e s D ire c to r a sk e d a se c u rityo f f ice r to lim it h is a c c e ss to th e b u ild in g , an d c a lled th e D o y les to w n p o lice to e sc o rt h im o u t. D o u ris ul t i m at el yobt ai ned an a ppl i cat i on, butdi d notappl yforthe pos i t i on. D o u ris, w h o u se s a w h e e lch a ir a n d h a s a rth ritis a n d o th e r a ilm e n ts, f iled su it i n D i stri ctC ou rtagainstB uck s C ou nty , D oy l est ow n B oroug h, theirem ploy ees and other s, cl ai m i ng di s cr i m i nat i on bas ed upon hi s di s abi l i t i es underfede r al and s t at e l aw , and v io la tio n s o f

h is c o n s titu tio n a l r ig h ts . T h e d e f e n d a n ts m o v e d to d is m is s th e c o m p la in t. 1 T he D i s tr i ctC our ti m pr oper l yconvert ed the mot i ons t o di s m i s s i nt o s um m aryj udgm ent m ot i ons , and cons i der ed document s s ubm i t t ed byD our i s , w i thoutpr ovi di ng the part i es not i ce of i t s i nt entt o do s o. See I n r e: R ockef el l erC tr . Pr opert i es , I nc. Sec. L i t i g. , 184T h e A D A p ro h ib its e m p lo y e rs f ro m m a k in g “ in q u iries o f a jo b a p p lica n t as to 2 w hethers uch appl i canti s an i ndi vi dual w i th a di s abi l i tyoras t o the natur e ors ever i tyof su ch d isab il ity . ” 4 2 U . S . C . § 1 2 1 1 2 (d)(2 )(A ). 3 F. 3d 280, 287- 88 ( 3d C i r . 1999) . T hi s err or , how ever , w as harm l es s beca us e, as di s cus s ed bel ow , D our i s ’ compl ai ntw oul d nothave s ur vi ved a mot i on t o di s m i s s . See i d. a t 2 8 9 . A p lain tiff

m u st s u f f e r a n a d v e rse e m p lo ym e n t ac tio n b e c a u se o f a d isa b ili tyto m a k e o u t a p rim a f

a c ie c a se u n d e r T itl e I o f th e A m e ric a n s w ith D isa b ili ties A c t ( “A D A ”) , 42 U . S. C . §§ 12111- 12117. D eane v. Pocono M ed. C tr . , 142 F. 3d 138, 142 ( 3d C i r . 1998) ( en banc ) . M anyof D our i s ’ cl ai m s fai l beca us e he ne verappl i ed forthe A c c o u n tin g A s s is ta n t p o s itio n , a n d d id n o t s u f f e r a n a d v e rs e e m p lo ym e n t a c tio n . D o u ri s claim s tha t a B u ck s C o u n tyem p loy ee m ad e a n im p rop er d isab il ityinq u iry byas ki ng hi m w hyhe nee ded an e m pl oym entappl i cat i on s entt o hi m i n the mai l . T o the ext entthi s ques t i on m aybe found t o vi ol at e the s t atut e, D our i s does notal l ege a ny 2 i nj ury . See al s o T i ce v. C entr e A r ea Tr ans p. A uth. , 247 F. 3d 506, 520 ( 3d C i r . 2001) (n o tin g th a t in th e a b s e n c e o f in ju ry, n o c la im c a n lie f

o r a v io la tio n o f

§ 1 2 1 1 2 (d )) . S im ilarly , D o u ris a lleg e s th a t th e A c c o u n tin g A ss ista n t jo b d e sc rip tio n im p ro p e rly r equi r es an appl i cantt o per form var i ous phy s i cal act i vi t i es , and thati f he pur s ued the jo b , the B o ro u g h o f

D o y les to w n w o u ld tick e t h im w h e n h e p a rk e d b e c a u se h e is u n a b le to putcoi ns i n t he met er s due t o hi s di s abi l i ty . B eca us e D our i s neverappl i ed forthe p o s i t i o n , h e f

a i l s t o s t a t e c l a i ms f

o rr e l i e f b a s e d u p o n th e s e a l l e g a t i o n s . F o rth e s a meA l though D our i s att ache d t o hi s compl ai ntan admi ni s tr at i ve rul i ng thatB ucks 3 C ounty ’ s j ob des cr i pt i on does notcompl yw i th the A D A , abs entan adve r s e empl oym ent act i on beca us e of a di s abi l i ty , D our i s does notes t abl i s h a pr i m a fa ci e ca s e of d is c ri m in a tio n . D our i s al s o fai l s t o s t at e a c l ai m underthe Penns y l vani a H um an R el at i ons A ctbas ed 4 upon thes e al l egat i ons . See K el l yv. D r exel U ni v. , 94 F. 3d 102, 105 ( 3d C i r . 1996) (st ati n g P H R A claim s w ere p rop erlytr ea ted a s co ex tens ive w ith A D A claim s). 4 re a so n , D o u ris’ c laim s th a t B u c k s C o u n tyis o b lig a ted to h ire v e ter a n s lik e h im se lf f irst, a n d to a c c o m m o d a te v e ter a n s’ d isa b ili ties , fa il. 3 D our i s al s o cl ai m s thatthe B ucks C ountydefe ndant s vi ol at ed the A D A byfai l i ng to p o st a n o tice in f

o rm in g jo b a p p lica n ts th a t th e ym a yf ile a n a d m in istra tiv e c h a rg e w ith the Equal E m pl oym entO ppor tuni tyC om m i s s i on. E ven as s um i ng D our i s has a ca us e of act i on fors uch a f

ai l ur e, as not ed bythe D i s tr i ctC ourt , anyi m pr operpos t i ng di d not p re v e n t D o u ris f

ro m f ili n g a tim e lya d m in istra tiv e c o m p lain t. D our i s al s o al l eges thatthe B ucks C ountyO ffi ce of H um an R es our ces i s not acc es s i bl e bec aus e i tdoes nothave a bi deti n the r es tr oom , and bec aus e he ha d t o w ai tt en m i nut es t o ent erthe bui l di ng beca us e the handi cappe d entr ance w as l ocked. W e agr ee w i th the D i s tr i ctC our tthatthe A D A does notr equi r e the pr ovi s i on of a bi det , s ee 28 C .F .R . § 3 5 .1 5 0 (a )(3 ) (p ro v id in g p u b lic e n tit ies n e e d n o t tak e a c tio n th a t w o u ld re su lt i n undue fi nanci al and admi ni s tr at i ve bur dens ) , and thatD our i s fai l s t o s t at e a c l ai m under the A D A bas ed upon the br i ef de l ayi n ent er i ng the bui l di ng. 4 F in a lly , D o u ris’ a lleg a tio n th a t h e w a s e sc o rte d f ro m th e m u n icip a l b u ild in g is i ns uffi ci entt o s t at e a c ons t i tut i onal vi ol at i on. A bs enta vi ol at i on of hi s s t atut oryor5

cons t i tut i onal r i ght s , D our i s does nothave a caus e of a ct i on under§ 1983. A l l ow i ng D o u ri s to a m e n d h is c o m p la in t w o u ld b e f u tile . S e e G ra y s o n v . M a yv ie w S ta te H o s p ., 293 F. 3d 103, 114 ( 3d C i r . 2002) . A ccor di ngl y , w e w i l l di s m i s s thi s appea l as fr i vol ous p u rs u a n t to 2 8 U .S .C . § 1 9 1 5 (e )( 2 )( B ).