863 F.2d 103 (D.C. Cir. 1988), 87-5380, Judd v. Billington

Docket Nº:87-5380.
Citation:863 F.2d 103
Party Name:Frederick D. JUDD, Appellant v. James H. BILLINGTON, Librarian of Congress.
Case Date:December 20, 1988
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

Page 103

863 F.2d 103 (D.C. Cir. 1988)

Frederick D. JUDD, Appellant


James H. BILLINGTON, Librarian of Congress.

No. 87-5380.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

December 20, 1988

Argued Nov. 15, 1988.

Page 104

Amy E. Wind, with whom Irving Kator and Douglas B. Huron, Washington, D.C., were on the brief, for appellant.

Daniel Bensing, Asst. U.S. Atty., with whom Jay B. Stephens, U.S. Atty., John D. Bates, Asst. U.S. Atty., Lana Kay Jones, and Martin F. O'Donoghue, Jr., Washington, D.C., were on the brief, for appellee.

Before: MIKVA, BUCKLEY, and D.H. GINSBURG, Circuit Judges.

Opinion for the Court filed by Circuit Judge MIKVA.

MIKVA, Circuit Judge:

Frederick D. Judd ("appellant") protests his discharge from the Library of Congress on the grounds that the Library violated the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 ("Rehabilitation Act"), 29 U.S.C. Sec. 791 et seq. (1982 & Supp.1988), section 201 of the Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Prevention, Treatment and Rehabilitation Act of 1970 ("Alcohol Act"), 42 U.S.C. Sec. 290dd-1 (Supp.1988), and certain Office of Personnel Management ("OPM") and Library of Congress regulations when it fired him. The district court granted summary judgment for the Library of Congress, and Judd appeals. We affirm on the ground that Judd failed to state a claim on which relief can be granted. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6).


    Frederick Judd was a long-time employee of the Library of Congress who was warned, disciplined and eventually discharged for habitually disappearing from work for hours at a time without leave. Judd claims that he was and is an alcoholic and that his supervisors knew that he abused alcohol and that alcoholism was the reason for his absences. Judd, by his own account, generally came to work sober, worked half a day, left for lunch and frequently did not return. Judd claims that he failed to return because he was drinking. On a few occasions, he returned to work under the influence. Judd's supervisors did not confront him with the possibility that he might be an alcoholic nor did Judd raise the issue with them. The Library of Congress maintained a Health Services Office which provides evaluation and counseling to employees with alcohol problems and, when necessary, refers them to outside facilities. Judd's supervisors repeatedly referred Judd to Health Services and encouraged him to seek its assistance if a health problem was a cause of his misconduct. They also provided Health Services with a copy of a written memorandum to Judd, and the Health Services alcoholism and drug abuse counselor made several attempts to contact Judd to discuss counseling.

    Judd protested his discharge through the Library of Congress' review procedures but an arbitrator upheld the Library's decision. Judd then sought judicial review. The court below granted summary judgment for the Library of Congress on the grounds that: (1) Judd had not exhausted his administrative remedies because he had not filed an Equal Employment Opportunity complaint; and (2) he had failed to make a sufficient showing that the Library knew or had reason to know...

To continue reading