Summary
The Fifth Circuit reviewed a jury verdict in favor of Kimberly Harmon, a Texas correctional officer who alleged disability discrimination and retaliation under the Rehabilitation Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. The court held that sovereign immunity barred the monetary ADA claims against the state official sued in his official capacity, but that sufficient evidence supported the Rehabilitation Act claims concerning Harmon’s qualification, accommodation, termination, and related employment actions. The court affirmed in part, reversed in part, vacated, and remanded.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court could enter monetary judgment against Collier in his official capacity on Harmon’s ADA claims despite sovereign immunity.
- Whether sufficient evidence supported the jury’s findings that TDCJ violated the Rehabilitation Act through disability discrimination, failure to accommodate, and retaliation in terminating Harmon.
- Whether sufficient evidence supported Harmon’s Rehabilitation Act failure-to-rehire discrimination and retaliation claims, including the applicability of cat’s-paw liability.
- Whether the jury’s findings of sole-cause disability discrimination and but-for retaliation were irreconcilably inconsistent.
- Whether the $1 million wages-and-benefits award improperly included pension benefits that should have been treated as front pay.
- Whether Harmon remained entitled to attorney’s fees after dismissal of the ADA claims against Collier and alteration of the damages award.
Holdings
- Because Harmon’s ADA claims were asserted solely against Collier in his official capacity and the only relief awarded was monetary, sovereign immunity barred the claims. The ADA did not waive the State’s sovereign immunity in these circumstances, and the district court abused its discretion by denying the Rule 59(e) motion on that ground.
- Sufficient evidence supported the jury’s finding that Harmon was an otherwise qualified individual under the Rehabilitation Act, notwithstanding her absences, because TDCJ maintained an extensive leave system and the evidence permitted a finding that her attendance was acceptable under the unwritten policy actually applied.
- Sufficient evidence supported the jury’s finding that TDCJ failed to reasonably accommodate Harmon. The evidence permitted the jury to find that her May 31 doctor's note requested only a one-day accommodation and that TDCJ terminated her before engaging in the required individualized interactive process.
- The evidence was sufficient for a reasonable jury to find that TDCJ violated the Rehabilitation Act through disability discrimination and retaliation. A failure-to-accommodate violation did not require proof of discriminatory animus, and the retaliation evidence, viewed deferentially, supported a finding of but-for causation.
- The majority held that Harmon’s cat’s-paw theory could not establish Rehabilitation Act discrimination based on failure to rehire because the statute’s sole-causation requirement could not be satisfied where a subordinate’s animus and the final decisionmaker’s independent decision both contributed to the adverse action. The majority therefore reversed the discrimination theory for insufficient evidence, while allowing the failure-to-rehire retaliation claim to proceed.
- The court declined to order a new trial based on the alleged inconsistency between the jury’s sole-cause discrimination findings and but-for retaliation findings. The verdict was treated as a general verdict, the defendants failed to object while the jury was empaneled, and plain-error review was not satisfied.
- The district court abused its discretion by entering the full $1 million wages-and-benefits award as backpay because at least part of the award likely included pension benefits payable only after the backpay period and therefore properly treated as front pay. The court vacated the monetary judgment and remanded for the district court to determine the portion, if any, properly includable as backpay.
- Harmon was not a prevailing party as to Collier because the ADA claims against him were dismissed and no judicially sanctioned relief remained on those claims. The award of attorney’s fees against Collier was reversed. The district court was left to determine on remand whether fees attributable to the surviving Rehabilitation Act claims should be reduced.
Key quotations
“Once it became clear that only monetary relief would be awarded, the ADA claims should have been dismissed because they were made solely against Collier, in his official capacity, and the ADA does not waive sovereign immunity.” (8)
“Accepting the Defendants’ argument would eliminate the employer’s duty to undergo an interactive process to determine a reasonable accommodation on an individualized basis.” (17)
“We hold that Harmon’s cat’s paw theory, as it regards her failure-to-rehire discrimination claim, fails as a matter of law.” (25)
“It was an abuse of discretion to enter a monetary judgment for the full $1 million in backpay because, as explained above, at least some of the $861,965.47 could only be awarded as front pay.” (38)
Factual background
Kimberly Harmon worked for the Texas Department of Criminal Justice as a correctional officer for approximately eighteen years and had diabetes, hypertension, and chronic lower-back pain. After a disputed shift change, Harmon filed internal grievances and an EEO complaint. In 2018, TDCJ separated her after concluding that she had exhausted her leave, although the evidence indicated that her leave balance may have been miscalculated and that TDCJ failed to process a doctor's note requesting additional leave or engage in an interactive accommodation process. When Harmon reapplied in 2019, one official recommended rehiring her while regional director John Werner recommended against rehiring her, and the final decisionmaker declined to rehire her.
Procedural history
Harmon sued in the Eastern District of Texas alleging disability discrimination and retaliation. A jury found for Harmon on all counts and awarded $800,000 in emotional-distress damages and $1 million in wages and benefits. The district court withheld the emotional-distress award under Cummings v. Premier Rehab Keller, P.L.L.C., entered judgment for $1 million, awarded attorney's fees and costs, and denied posttrial motions. The Fifth Circuit affirmed in part, reversed in part, vacated, and remanded.
Remand instructions
Dismiss the ADA claims against Collier because sovereign immunity bars the monetary claims; reverse the attorney’s-fee award against Collier; determine the proper amount of ERS benefits, if any, includable as backpay and remit the $1 million award accordingly; permit Harmon to accept the remittitur or elect a new trial solely on damages; and reconsider attorney’s fees for the surviving Rehabilitation Act claims in light of the altered judgment and degree of success.