Daniel Kimbro, Plaintiff-Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Atlantic Richfield Company, Defendant-Appellee/cross-Appellant

Good Law
889 F.2d 869·1989 WL 135751·1 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 1537·52 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 39,495·57 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 363
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 14, 198987-3903, 87-4007California6,886 words

Opinion

Opinion

Ferguson, J.

Appellant Daniel Kimbro appeals the district court’s judgment in favor of Atlantic Richfield (ARCO) in his action alleging handicap discrimination, breach of contract, and violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). Kimbro, a machinist at an ARCO refinery, was discharged after ten years of employment with the company for excessive absenteeism and tardiness. Kimbro contends that ARCO failed to make reasonable accommodations to his physical impairments and thus violated Washington’s statutory provision forbidding discrimination against the disabled in the workplace. He also claims that ARCO breached their employment contract by discharging him before he had an opportunity to use all of his sick leave benefits, and by not considering the proper factors in its decision to terminate him. Finally, Kimbro alleges that his discharge was in retaliation for his past use of ERISA-protected employee sick leave benefits. ARCO appeals the district court’s denial of its request for attorneys’ fees. We affirm in part and reverse in part.

I.

Plaintiff Daniel Kimbro was hired as a machinist by ARCO in 1971 to work in the Cherry Point, Washington, oil refinery. Since…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.