Bluestein v. Cent. Wis. Anesthesiology (Summary)

DISABILITY AND SEX DISCRIMINATION

Bluestein v. Cent. Wis. Anesthesiology, No. 12-cv-322-bbc (W.D. Wis. Nov. 12, 2013)

The United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin granted an anesthesiology group’s motion for summary judgment in a discrimination suit brought by an anesthesiologist who was a full partner and shareholder of the group.

The anesthesiologist was injured while kayaking.  As a result of her injuries, she requested multiple accommodations, including an open-ended medical leave of absence.  The group denied the leave of absence and, ultimately, terminated the anesthesiologist.  The anesthesiologist sued, claiming, among other things, that she was discriminated against in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) and Title VII.  The court dismissed her ADA claim, concluding that the ADA only protects employees.  The court concluded that the anesthesiologist was an “employer” due to her being a shareholder and member of the board of the group.  Accordingly, she was not protected by the ADA.  The court also found that the anesthesiologist failed to present evidence that she was “disabled” under the ADA because her complaint “speaks only in the broadest terms of how [her] condition limits any of her major life activities.”  Moreover, her request for an indefinite leave of absence was not a “reasonable accommodation” under the ADA since she failed to provide evidence that the leave would restore her ability to work as an anesthesiologist.  The court also dismissed the anesthesiologist’s sex discrimination claim under Title VII based on the court’s finding that she was not an employee of the group.