92 F.3d 1187 (7th Cir. 1996), 95-1491, Scarbrough v. Runyon

Docket Nº:95-1491.
Citation:92 F.3d 1187
Party Name:Norma J. SCARBROUGH, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Marvin T. RUNYON, Postmaster General, Defendant-Appellee.
Case Date:August 02, 1996
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Page 1187

92 F.3d 1187 (7th Cir. 1996)

Norma J. SCARBROUGH, Plaintiff-Appellant,


Marvin T. RUNYON, Postmaster General, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 95-1491.

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit

August 2, 1996

Submitted July 18, 1996. [*]

Editorial Note:

This opinion appears in the Federal reporter in a table titled "Table of Decisions Without Reported Opinions". (See FI CTA7 Rule 53 regarding use of unpublished opinions)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Evansville Division, No. EV 93-117-C; Gene E. Brooks, Judge.



Before BAUER, EASTERBROOK and DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judges.


Norma J. Scarbrough appeals summary judgment in favor of the Postmaster General on her Rehabilitation Act and Title VII claims. We affirm.

Between 1986 and 1990, Scarbrough was employed as a letter carrier at an Evansville, Indiana branch post office. During her employment, she was disciplined for excessive absence and tardiness: in 1988, she received a warning letter detailing eleven separate usages of sick leave and thirteen incidents of tardiness, and in 1989, she received a seven-day suspension (eventually reduced to a letter of warning) for six separate usages of sick leave and six incidents of tardiness between January and August.

On January 26, 1990, Scarbrough, after returning undelivered mail to the post office in the middle of her shift, was admitted to the hospital for treatment of major depression. A notice of removal based upon her unauthorized absence from her assignment was reduced to a fourteen-day suspension, providing Scarbrough with a "last chance" to prove she could maintain a regular work schedule and avoid unexpected absences. Although the doctors' letters Scarbrough had submitted to explain her illness stated that she would have no work restrictions, Scarbrough was tardy seven more times between May 16 and July 24. On August 21, 1990, Scarbrough was issued another notice of removal based upon these incidents, and her removal became effective September 26, 1990. 1

Scarbrough asserts that the post office's actions violated the Rehabilitation Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 791 et seq., Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e et seq., and the Equal Protection Clause. Because Scarbrough failed to demonstrate the existence of a genuine issue of fact, the district court granted summary judgment for the defendant. Having reviewed the case de novo, Smith v. Shawnee Library Sys., 60 F.3d 317, 320 (7th Cir.1995), we affirm.

Summary judgment is appropriate when the district court determines from the pleadings, affidavits, and other submissions that there are no genuine issues of material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c); see Celotex Corp....

To continue reading