The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal of an art teacher's disability discrimination claim against a school district because she allegedly threatened to harm herself and her child at school while experiencing a major depressive disorder.
Whitewater Middle School in the Fayette County, Ga., School District hired the plaintiff as an art teacher in 2009. The plaintiff's father had committed suicide the year before, triggering the plaintiff's own suicidal thoughts. The plaintiff struggled with her father's death and her mental health in the years that followed. She shared this with Whitewater's principal, who helped refer her to a therapist.
The therapist diagnosed the plaintiff with major depressive disorder and anxiety. The principal supported the plaintiff by discussing her mental health, medication, treatment and related matters with her over the years. The principal adjusted the plaintiff's work schedule so she could attend therapy appointments in the mornings before coming to work.
The plaintiff also confided in other teachers at Whitewater. In particular, the plaintiff recalls discussing her thoughts of suicide with a fellow teacher who urged her not to act on those thoughts because she had a son. Yet on Friday, Jan. 20, 2017, after the plaintiff had a minor argument with the school administration, the plaintiff allegedly told the fellow teacher that, if she had a gun, she and her son would not have come back from winter break.
The plaintiff allegedly called another teacher that evening and described six ways that she had considered killing her son and herself. She disparaged her father and her son's father and said she did not want to let her son grow up with bad genes.
Fellow teachers checked on the plaintiff over the weekend and visited her classroom on Monday. At that time, the plaintiff allegedly threatened herself and her son. She also allegedly admitted that she had taken three Xanax pills earlier in the day and took two more during their conversation. The two teachers decided to notify the school administration.
The plaintiff claimed that her Friday statements were not about suicide but that she wished she and her son had not come back from the beach. She claimed that, during their conversation that evening, a fellow teacher described her own thoughts of suicide. The plaintiff further claimed that the two teachers badgered her about her mental health the following Monday.
That Monday, the principal learned of the plaintiff's ingestion of multiple Xanax pills and alleged threats to kill herself and her son, who was a student at the school. She immediately consulted the school resource officer, a sheriff's department employee, who removed the plaintiff from her classroom as a safety precaution. The plaintiff denied that she had threatened or planned to kill herself or her son, and said she had a therapist appointment that afternoon. The school arranged for a fellow teacher to drive the plaintiff to the appointment.
After the appointment, the teacher claimed that the plaintiff again threatened herself and her son. As a result, the school arranged for another teacher to take the plaintiff's son home with her, and the plaintiff was persuaded to go to a hospital for a mental evaluation. The next day, the hospital sought permission from the plaintiff's therapist to admit her to a mental health facility, which she allowed. The plaintiff was admitted involuntarily and released four days later.
When the plaintiff was released, her son was taken into protective custody, and the school district investigated her situation. She was placed on administrative leave and then took leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). After she returned to work, another teacher reported that the plaintiff told her of violent thoughts against school employees and administrators. The plaintiff disputed this description of events.
The school reported this information to human resources, which sent the plaintiff a notice of nonrenewal of her employment contract. The plaintiff sued, alleging that the school district violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Rehabilitation Act and the FMLA. The school district filed a motion for summary judgment, which was granted by the district court.
[Want to learn more? Join us at the SHRM Annual Conference & Expo 2021, taking place Sept. 9-12 in Las Vegas and virtually.]
On appeal, the 11th Circuit found that the plaintiff had stated an initial case of discrimination and retaliation, but that the school district had established a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for its decision. The school district's honest belief that the plaintiff threatened harm to herself and others, even if caused by her disability, was sufficient to support its nonrenewal decision.
Todd v. Fayette County School District, 11th Cir., No. 19-13821 (May 27, 2021).
Professional Pointer: Employers can and should take seriously employee threats of violence. The law generally protects employers from discrimination claims when they act in good faith based on a reported threat.
Jeffrey Rhodes is an attorney with McInroy, Rigby & Rhodes LLP in Arlington, Va.
An organization run by AI is not a futuristic concept. Such technology is already a part of many workplaces and will continue to shape the labor market and HR. Here's how employers and employees can successfully manage generative AI and other AI-powered systems.
Related Content
HR must always include human intelligence and oversight of AI in decision-making in hiring and firing, a legal expert said at SHRM24. She added that HR can ensure compliance by meeting the strictest AI standards, which will be in Colorado’s upcoming AI law.
The proliferation of artificial intelligence in the workplace, and the ensuing expected increase in productivity and efficiency, could help usher in the four-day workweek, some experts predict.
Learn how Marsh McLennan successfully boosts staff well-being with digital tools, improving productivity and work satisfaction for more than 20,000 employees.