Jasmantas v. Subaru-Isuzu Automotive, Inc., SUBARU-ISUZU
Decision Date | 26 March 1998 |
Docket Number | SUBARU-ISUZU,No. 96-2918,96-2918 |
Citation | 139 F.3d 1155 |
Parties | 7 A.D. Cases 1859, 12 NDLR P 92 Leta JASMANTAS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v.AUTOMOTIVE, INC., Defendant-Appellee. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Seventh Circuit |
Barry A. Macey (argued), Nora L. Macey, Macey, Macey & Swanson, Indianapolis, IN, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
David D. Robinson, Wayne O. Adams, III (argued), Steven F. Pockrass, Johnson, Smith, Pence, Densborn, Wright & Heath, Indianapolis, IN, for Defendant-Appellee.
Charles B. Baldwin, Kenneth B. Siepman, Locke, Reynolds, Boyd & Weisell, Indianapolis, IN, for Amicus Curiae.
Before ROVNER, DIANE P. WOOD, and EVANS, Circuit Judges.
In a companion case issued today, Dalton v. Subaru-Isuzu Automotive, Inc., 7 A.D. Cases 1872 (7th Cir.1998), we describe the claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., of a number of individuals who worked at the Subaru-Isuzu Automotive, Inc. (SIA), plant in Lafayette, Indiana. Their claims all related to SIA's alleged failures to accommodate their disabilities. Their co-worker, Leta Jasmantas, also sued SIA, but she asserted that the company discharged her because of her disability or in retaliation for her act of filing charges with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The district court granted summary judgment for SIA on both her claims, which we hereby affirm.
After three years of working in SIA's Paint section, in September of 1992, Jasmantas was transferred to the Black and Wax section. In her new position, Jasmantas was required to inject rust-preventing wax into cars passing overhead on the assembly line. By November 1992, she had developed numbness in her fingers and pain in her arm and shoulder. She took some personal time off work, hoping that things would improve, but the pain and discomfort returned when she resumed work in a variety of positions in 1993. This led her to visit a doctor, who imposed permanent work restrictions calling for Jasmantas to work at her own pace and avoid rate production or repetitive jobs. SIA accordingly placed Jasmantas on disability leave. It soon brought her back to work, briefly assigning her to the Paint section before transferring her to the Supplier Quality Assurance (SQA) department in January 1994. In her new position in SQA, Jasmantas was supervised by Group Leader Bob Sellers. Jasmantas found Sellers to be hostile towards her and another disabled employee in the department. She reported that he "was always watching over [her] shoulder and insisting that [she] do all parts of the job without assistance." Former SIA employee Patricia Sheppard indicated that Sellers had complained to her about the company's placement of employees with restrictions in SQA, because he thought that they did not work as hard as temporary employees and were "nothing but trouble."
All this was a prelude to Jasmantas' more serious problems, which began on June 22, 1994. At that time, Jasmantas was trying to perform her job even though she had a sore back from an injury she had suffered the day before. To help her avoid aggravating the injury, other employees on the team were assisting her with some of the more physically demanding aspects of her work. Sellers did not approve, even though this type of teamwork had happened at least once before. He therefore approached Jasmantas and ordered her to go to the medical clinic. She went and was examined by SIA Medical Director, Dr. Warrick Barrett, who assigned her the following work restriction:
RESTRICTION: NO BENDING/TWISTING/SQUATTING/STOOPING/LIFTING--MAY DO UNLIMITED STANDING WORK. (If no placement available, should remain at bed rest for 2-3 days, then gradual/careful resumption of activity as tolerated.)
Since no jobs that were immediately available fit the bill, Jasmantas was sent home.
For three days, Jasmantas rested in bed as Dr. Barrett had ordered. On Sunday, June 26, she spent (at most) 30 minutes pruning and trimming the bushes in her yard. Some of this work involved bending and stooping. This activity did not cause her undue discomfort, and she believed that it was consistent with her medical restrictions, which permitted a gradual resumption of activity "as tolerated." Unbeknownst to Jasmantas, however, SIA's suspicions about her truthfulness in reporting injuries had been aroused earlier, when another doctor had expressed concern about her. SIA therefore dispatched private investigators to her home to see if she was telling the truth this time. Using a telephoto lens, the investigators photographed Jasmantas while she worked in the yard. When Carolyn Thurton, the Senior Case Manager for SIA's worker's compensation claims, saw the photos, she telephoned Jasmantas to interview her. Thurton, with Jasmantas' knowledge and consent, tape recorded the conversation. When Thurton asked Jasmantas if she had stayed within the medical restrictions imposed by Dr. Barrett, Jasmantas replied "yes" and said that she was not involved in any outside activities, sports, or hobbies. Jasmantas also said that under her restrictions, she believed that she "was to gradually start increasing, resuming doing things," but that she was not getting very far.
On June 30, 1994, Jasmantas met with Dr. Barrett for a follow-up appointment. Jasmantas claimed that she told Dr. Barrett that she was feeling better, but that her back was stiff from the drive to the clinic. Dr. Barrett's report added that Jasmantas had also...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Todaro v. Township of Union
...held to be insufficient to permit the inference of a causal link between the two occurrences. See, e.g., Jasmantas v. Subaru-Isuzu Automotive, Inc., 139 F.3d 1155 (7th Cir.1998); Richmond v. ONEOK, Inc., 120 F.3d 205 (10th ...
-
Anderson v. The Foster Group
...insufficient to establish retaliation and therefore affirming award summary judgment for defendant); Jasmantas v. Subaru-Isuzu Auto., Inc., 139 F.3d 1155, 1158 (7th Cir. 1998) (one-month between employee's filing of EEOC charge and her discharge insufficient to link filing of charge to term......
-
Jones v. Laporte Cnty. Sheriff's Dep't
...six-week gap between filing of EEOC charge and termination was insufficient to establish retaliation); Jasmantas v. Subaru-Isuzu Auto., Inc., 139 F.3d 1155, 1157-58 (7th Cir. 1998) (holding three-month gap between employee's filing of EEOC charge and her discharge was insufficient to link f......
-
Equal Emp't Opportunity Comm'n v. AutoZone, Inc.
...... retaliation”); Jasmantas v. Subaru-Isuzu Auto.,. Inc., 139 F.3d 1155, 1158 (7th Cir. 1998) ......
-
Disability Discrimination
...by which each plaintiff’s job prospects in that area were reduced by his or her disability); Jasmantas v. Subaru-Isuzu Auto., Inc. , 139 F.3d 1155, 1157 (7th Cir. 1998) (expert testified plaintiff was precluded from performing 88% of jobs in county that she would have been able to fill abse......
-
Table of cases
...2000), §9:1.D.1 Jasany v. United States Postal Serv. , 755 F.2d 1244 (6th Cir. 1985), §21:6.G Jasmantas v. Subaru-Isuzu Auto., Inc. , 139 F.3d 1155 (7th Cir. 1998), §21:4.B.4 Jaso v. Travis County Juvenile Bd ., 6 S.W.3d 324 (Tex. App.—Austin 1999, no pet.), §23:2.A Jay Metals, Inc. , 308 N......
-
Disability Discrimination
...by which each plaintiff’s job prospects in that area were reduced by his or her disability); Jasmantas v. Subaru-Isuzu Auto., Inc. , 139 F.3d 1155, 1157 (7th Cir. 1998) (expert testified plaintiff was precluded from performing 88% of jobs in county that she would have been able to fill abse......
-
Table of cases
...2000), §9:1.D.1 Jasany v. United States Postal Serv. , 755 F.2d 1244 (6th Cir. 1985), §21:6.G Jasmantas v. Subaru-Isuzu Auto., Inc. , 139 F.3d 1155 (7th Cir. 1998), §21:4.B.4 Jaso v. Travis County Juvenile Bd ., 6 S.W.3d 324 (Tex. App.—Austin 1999, no pet.), §23:2.A Jay Metals, Inc. , 308 N......