Allen v. Rapides Parish School Board

Decision Date02 March 2000
Docket NumberNo. 98-31215,98-31215
Citation204 F.3d 619
Parties(5th Cir. 2000) ROBERT D. ALLEN, Plaintiff-Appellant v. RAPIDES PARISH SCHOOL BOARD, Defendant-Appellee
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana

Before HIGGINBOTHAM and SMITH, Circuit Judges, and FALLON, District Judge.*

FALLON, District Judge:

Robert D. Allen sued the Rapides Parish School Board ("Board") for discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 ("ADA"). Allen asserts that the Board discriminatorily diminished his position and commensurate salary within the Rapides Parish school district because he suffered from tinnitus, a condition causing him to hear a continuous loud ringing in his ears. The Board contends that it did not discriminate against Allen and afforded him a reasonable accommodation. Because the district court correctly granted summary judgment for the Board, we affirm.

I.

Allen holds a doctorate in education and has been employed by the Board since 1981. From 1981 to 1988, he held various positions including librarian and teacher. He was promoted to assistant principal at Ball Elementary School ("Ball") in 1988. In 1990, he became the assistant principal/librarian at Ball and agreed to a four-year contract which paid him $42,035 a year.

The Board again promoted Allen in August, 1994 to the position of Coordinator of the Media Center, Testing and Research for which his annual salary increased to $47,825. In conjunction with his new position, Allen signed a new two-year contract. The contract entitled Allen to a position of equal status and pay if he were transferred during the two-year term. If his position were abolished, however, the Board agreed to transfer or reassign him if possible to a position of equal rank.

Soon after Allen began his new job his tinnitus condition worsened. Since 1977, Allen has suffered from tinnitus, a condition causing a constant ringing in the ears which often incites nervousness and agitation. The effects of tinnitus can be mitigated by sufficient ambient noise that masks the ringing sound.

On December 12, 1994, Allen wrote to Superintendent Dr. Betty Cox ("Cox") requesting a transfer to the position of principal at an elementary school. In the letter, Allen explained that "when I am in a quiet building, office, or room, this ringing makes me very uncomfortable and nervous. . . . However, when I am in a school setting, the normal noise levels in the school . . . muffles this tinnitus." Appellee's Ex. D. Allen's doctors also submitted letters supporting a change in Allen's environment to provide more background noise.

Cox responded to Allen's concerns by giving him the choices of (1) closing his door and playing music, (2) moving his office to an area close to where videos are recorded, and (3) putting a television in his office. Allen dismissed each of these suggestions.

From February 20, 1995 to June 30, 1995, Allen took sick leave from his position as coordinator because he claimed his tinnitus was aggravated and he was close to suffering a nervous breakdown. His doctors sent additional letters during this time to Cox requesting a "lateral transfer to an environment in which a significant amount of noise exists." Pl.'s Opp. Ex. F. Allen sought additional sick leave from July 1, 1995 until he could be "transferred to an administrative position in a school setting." Def.'s Ex. C. Cox instead granted Allen sabbatical leave from August 17, 1995 to May 31, 1996.

During Allen's sabbatical leave, the Board eliminated several positions including Allen's job as media center coordinator because of significant budget cuts. The Board notified Allen and instructed him to contact the director of personnel to determine his new job for the coming school year. When his sabbatical concluded in August, 1996, Allen became the librarian at Tioga High School.

In February 1997, Allen again complained that his new position failed to produce enough background noise to mitigate the symptoms of his tinnitus. He sought another transfer in August, 1997 and ultimately accepted the librarian position at Horseshoe Elementary School. This position, however, resulted in a decrease in his yearly salary to $37,956.

Allen admits that his current position at Horseshoe Elementary School satisfies the needs of his tinnitus. Because an elementary school library holds more classes and programs than a high school library, Allen finds his new environment noisier and more accommodating. Allen now also has hearing aids which alleviate the problems of his tinnitus condition.

Nevertheless, Allen argues that the Board denied him promotions and refused his transfer requests to various administrative positions because he suffered from tinnitus. 1 The Board insists that it made reasonable accommodations for Allen and did not hire him as a principal or an assistant principal because he failed to test high enough in the screening process.

The district court assumed that tinnitus was a disability and that Allen was a qualified individual under the ADA, but it granted the Board's motion for summary judgment because it found that the Board had provided Allen with a reasonable accommodation.

The district court also agreed with the Board that the position of assistant principal/librarian did not qualify as a "teacher" under Louisiana's Teacher Tenure Law as Allen contends. Therefore, the court held that Allen could not attain tenure in that position as a matter of law and granted summary judgment for the Board.

II.

We review de novo the grant of summary judgment by a district court and apply in our review the same standard used by the district court. See Taylor v. Principal Fin. Group, Inc. 93 F.3d 155, 161 (5th Cir. 1996). Summary judgment is appropriate when the record demonstrates "that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Id.; Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(c). According to this standard, we "review the facts drawing all inferences most favorable to the party opposing the motion." Taylor, 93 F.3d at 161. "If the moving party meets the initial burden of showing there is no genuine issue of material fact, the burden shifts to the nonmoving party to produce evidence or designate specific facts showing the existence of a genuine issue for trial." Id. (quoting Engstrom v. First Nat'l Bank, 47 F.3d 1459, 1462 (5th Cir. 1995).

A.

The ADA prohibits employment discrimination against persons with a disability. It provides that:

(n)o covered entity shall discriminate against a qualified individual with a disability because of the disability of such individual in regard to job application procedures, the hiring, advancement, or discharge of employees, employee compensation, job training, and other terms and conditions, and privileges of employment.

42 U.S.C. 12112(a).

The ADA defines "disability" in pertinent part as "a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of such individual." Id. 12102(2)(a).

"Discrimination" under the statute includes:

not making reasonable accommodations to the known physical or mental limitations of an otherwise qualified individual with a disability who is an applicant or employee, unless such covered entity can demonstrate that the accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the operation of the business of such covered entity.

Id. 12112(b)(5)(A).

A "qualified individual with a disability means an individual with a disability who, with or without a reasonable accommodation, can perform the essential functions of the employment position that such individual holds or desires." Id. 12111(8).

A "reasonable accommodation" may include:

(A) making existing facilities used by employees readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities; and

(B) job restructuring, part-time or modified work schedules, reassignment to a vacant position, acquisition or modification or equipment or devices, appropriate adjustment or modification of examinations, training materials or policies, the provision of qualified readers or interpreters, and other similar accommodations for individuals with disabilities.

Id. 12111(9).

B.

Allen argues that the Board denied him a reasonable accommodation by not transferring him to any vacant principal or vice-principal positions. In support of this contention, Allen accuses the Board of circumventing the interactive process required to find him a reasonable accommodation.2 Specifically, Allen points to the fact that Cox took almost six months to complete even an "extremely superficial examination of the issue [his tinnitus]," and that she then offered him three insufficient accommodations - the use of a radio, television, or an another office closer to audio-visual equipment.

Allen does demonstrate a breakdown in the interactive process. He satisfies the notice requirements of Taylor and Beck by showing that the Board knew of his limitations. Taylor, 93 F.3d at 163; Beck, 75 F.3d at 1137. Allen and his doctors sent numerous unanswered letters to Cox concerning the existence, the effects, and the possible mitigation of his tinnitus. These communications are the type of information contemplated by the regulations and eventually prompted Allen's transfer to the librarian position at Horseshoe Elementary School. Therefore, Allen does raise an issue of material fact as to whether he satisfied the requirements of Taylor and Beck for an interactive process especially when construing the fact inferences in favor of Allen. But this alone is not sufficient to establish an ADA claim.

While Allen may establish that he made the Board aware of his condition and that he did not receive the transfer he sought, Allen fails to demonstrate that the transfers he did receive were not reasonable accommodations. The record reveals that Allen was given...

To continue reading

Request your trial
312 cases
  • Pedroza v. Autozone, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Texas
    • 29 Enero 2008
    ...choose what job to which he will be assigned, or to receive the same compensation as he received previously. Allen v. Rapides Parish Sch. Bd., 204 F.3d 619, 622-23 (5th Cir.2000). ...
  • Bennett v. Calabrian Chemicals Corp.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Texas
    • 9 Junio 2004
    ...Cir.2001); Dupre v. Charter Behavioral Health Sys. of Lafayette Inc., 242 F.3d 610, 613 n. 2 (5th Cir.2001); Allen v. Rapides Parish Sch. Bd., 204 F.3d 619, 621 (5th Cir.2000); Seaman, 179 F.3d at 300. "The ADA seeks to eliminate unwarranted discrimination against disabled individuals in or......
  • Carpenter v. Itawamba Co. Jail
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Northern District of Mississippi
    • 11 Abril 2022
    ...Lobby , Inc. , 477 U.S. 242, 249, 106 S. Ct. 2505, 2511, 91 L. Ed. 2d 202 (1986) ; Beck , 204 F.3d at 633 ; Allen v. Rapides Parish School Bd. , 204 F.3d 619, 621 (5th Cir. 2000) ; Ragas v. Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company , 136 F.3d 455, 458 (5th Cir. 1998). Substantive law determines what i......
  • Lloyd v. Birkman
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Texas
    • 2 Septiembre 2015
    ...trial. Distribuidora Mari Jose, S.A. de C.V. v. Transmaritime, Inc., 738 F.3d 703, 706 (5th Cir.2013) (quoting Allen v. Rapides Parish Sch. Bd., 204 F.3d 619, 621 (5th Cir.2000) ). "Where the record taken as a whole could not lead a rational trier of fact to find for the non-moving party, t......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
6 books & journal articles
  • Disability Discrimination
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Texas Employment Law. Volume 1 - 2014 Part V. Discrimination in employment
    • 16 Agosto 2014
    ...p. 5440; see also Rizzo III , 213 F.3d at 213 (noting obligations of employer and employee); Allen v. Rapides Parish School Bd. , 204 F.3d 619, 622 & n.2 (5th Cir. 2000). “When the disability and/or the need for accommodation is not obvious, the employer may ask the individual for reasonabl......
  • Disability Discrimination
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Texas Employment Law. Volume 1 - 2017 Part V. Discrimination in employment
    • 9 Agosto 2017
    ...p. 5440; see also Rizzo III , 213 F.3d at 213 (noting obligations of employer and employee); Allen v. Rapides Parish School Bd. , 204 F.3d 619, 622 & n.2 (5th Cir. 2000). “When the disability and/or the need for accommodation is not obvious, the employer may ask the individual for reasonabl......
  • Disability discrimination
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Texas Employment Law. Volume 1 Part V. Discrimination in employment
    • 5 Mayo 2018
    ...p. 5440; see also Rizzo III , 213 F.3d at 213 (noting obligations of employer and employee); Allen v. Rapides Parish School Bd. , 204 F.3d 619, 622 & n.2 (5th Cir. 2000). “When the disability and/or the need for accommodation is not obvious, the employer may ask the individual for reasonabl......
  • Disability Discrimination
    • United States
    • James Publishing Practical Law Books Archive Texas Employment Law. Volume 1 - 2016 Part V. Discrimination in Employment
    • 27 Julio 2016
    ...Rizzo III, 213 F.3d §21:6 Texas Employment Law at 213 (noting obligations of employer and employee); Allen v. Rapides Parish School Bd., 204 F.3d 619, 622 n.2 (5th Cir. 2000). “When the disability and/or the need for accommodation is not obvious, the employer may ask the individual for reas......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT