in Greenville. They needed the approval of the Greenville
Area Business Leader, so they met with her to pitch their proposal. During that meeting,
the Leader asked about Perdue's health and Perdue explained the situation. The Leader
said that she had concerns about Hunt's competence and attention to detail. As an example,
she explained that Hunt had submitted an expense report incorrectly when she had first
started working in the Greenville territory that January. And the Business Leader also told
Perdue and Hunt that their 2016 end-of-year reviews were not relevant because they were
completed by another Area Business Leader.
In early May, Sanofi's human-resources department suggested other
accommodations. Sanofi offered "a hotel stay in order to better break up [Perdue's] days
and limit her travel." J.A. 243. But Perdue said that "wouldn't help." J.A. 243. Sanofi
also asked if Perdue had a comfortable car. But Perdue explained that she liked her
Equinox and it was comfortable. Perdue testified at her deposition that her doctor said that
hotel stays and a new car would not help her symptoms. J.A. 108. Sanofi also suggested
that Perdue check for job openings listed on the company's internal portal.
The next day Sanofi - through the Greenville Area Business Leader - denied
Perdue and Hunt's request to create the job share, explaining that "the business would not
support a job share arrangement" at that time. J.A. 321. The Greenville Area Business
Leader added that "at this point in time with all the changes happening at Sanofi, this would
not be a good business decision." J.A. 103-04. The Leader stated in her deposition that
she was concerned about Hunt being "a good fit at that time for a job share." J.A. 200.
She noted that Hunt "had just started reporting to [her], and [she] had concerns about her
attention to detail and her meeting metrics." Id. These concerns, she explained, were
magnified by the "tense environment within the company" after the recent restructuring
and layoffs. The Regional Business Leader approved the decision to deny the job share for
similar reasons.
After the job share was denied, Perdue continued on short-term disability leave.
With her short-term disability benefits running out and no sign that her medical restrictions
would be abated, Perdue spoke with human resources about her next steps. This led her to
apply for long-term disability. Soon after, she was fired, as Sanofi could not provide her
"with an indefinite leave of absence" and there were "no other accommodations that would
enable [her] to perform the essential functions of [her] job." J.A. 48.
B. The proceedings below
After she was fired, Perdue sued Sanofi in federal district court alleging violations
of the ADA , 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., and wrongful discharge under North Carolina law.
Sanofi moved for summary judgment on all claims, and Perdue moved for partial summary
judgment. The district court granted Sanofi's motion and denied Perdue's. See Perdue v.
Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC, No. 1:18-cv-00221-MR, 2019 WL 4874815, at *16 (W.D.N.C.
Oct. 2, 2019). Perdue