Wells v. Cincinnati Children’s Hosp. Med. Ctr. (Summary)

ADA & FMLA

Wells v. Cincinnati Children’s Hosp. Med. Ctr., No. 1:10-CV-619 (S.D. Ohio Feb. 15, 2012)

The United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio granted in part and denied in part a hospital’s motion for summary judgment against a nurse’s claims that the hospital had violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and the Family Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) and that the hospital had defamed the nurse and invaded her privacy.

The nurse sought and began treatment, including prescription narcotics, for her gastrointestinal problems. Soon after, her supervisors began noticing several instances of erratic behavior, including going to the wrong room to start an IV and “blacking out” during work for a four-hour period. The nurse was suspended without pay, pending completion of a fitness-for-duty examination. The physician who conducted the fitness-for-duty evaluation concluded that the nurse posed a critical risk to patients due to her misuse of her medications. Nonetheless, the hospital and nurse entered into a “return to work” agreement, requiring the nurse to seek treatment for her misuse of her medications during an FMLA leave.

After completion of the program, however, the hospital remained unconvinced that the nurse could safely return to her work in the Critical Airway Unit, despite another physician’s contention that she was fit to return to work. The hospital relegated the nurse to other, less than full-time, work and filed a report with the state Board of Nursing stating that the nurse was a substance abuser. The nurse sued the hospital for ADA and FMLA violations, defamation, and invasion of privacy.

The hospital argued that it was entitled to summary judgment on the nurse’s ADA claims based on the hospital’s requirement that she undergo an evaluation due to erratic behavior and her suspension. The court agreed, concluding, “an employer is entitled to require an employee to undergo a medical examination to determine the cause of the employee’s aberrant behavior.”

However, the court refused to grant summary judgment on the nurse’s ADA claims based on the hospital’s not reinstating the nurse to the Critical Airway Unit when she returned to work. On this issue, the court found that there was direct evidence that the hospital perceived the nurse as disabled and denied her reinstatement on that basis. The court was not persuaded by the hospital’s “direct threat” defense, considering the hospital could not have deemed her as such since it “saw fit to allow [the nurse] to work in other areas of the hospital.” Nonetheless, the nurse’s failure to accommodate claim under the ADA was dismissed because there was no evidence that she ever requested accommodation.
With respect to the nurse’s FMLA interference claim, the court denied the hospital’s motion for summary judgment arguing that the nurse was not entitled to restoration of her position because her 12 weeks of leave expired. According to the court, “there [was] a material issue of fact whether the [nurse] could perform all the essential functions of her job before the expiration of the FMLA leave.” However, the court dismissed the nurse’s defamation claim, finding that the hospital’s report to the state Board of Nursing was privileged and entitled to immunity, as there was no evidence of bad faith in making the report. Finally, the court granted summary judgment in favor of the hospital regarding the invasion of privacy claim because the nurse had no firsthand knowledge of comments allegedly made about her drug abuse during a training session.