Application of ADA on Summary Judgment
Plaintiff Dark was a heavy-equipment operator for the Road Department of Curry County, Oregon. Dark suffers from epilepsy. His seizures are usually preceded by a nervous jerk, called an "aura." Dark experienced an aura, went to work despite the aura, and suffered a seizure while driving a County truck. The County terminated Dark after receiving a doctor's report recommending that he not work around moving machinery. Dark then sued for wrongful termination under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the County, finding no genuine issue of material fact that the County terminated Dark for misconduct (acting recklessly by driving the truck despite constructive knowledge of an imminent seizure). The Ninth Circuit reversed, holding that Dark had raised genuine issues of material fact about the reasons for his termination, about whether he was qualified for his position despite his disability, and about whether he posed a direct threat to the safety of others. The decision relied in part on a holding that conduct resulting from a disability (e.g. driving despite knowing of the possibility of an imminent seizure) is generally deemed to be part of the disability, rather than a separate basis for termination. Given that Judge O'Scannlain (typically one of the more conservative members of the Ninth Circuit) ruled in favor of the employee in a published opinion, the case could signal a trend toward greater sympathy for employees on ADA claims. Dark v. Curry County, No. 04-36087 (9th Cir. July 6, 2006)