William E. Fuller v. Anthony M. Frank, Postmaster General Mary Frank

Good Law
122 A.L.R. Fed. 699·916 F.2d 558·1990 WL 151302·1 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 1701·54 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 40,310
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 11, 199089-15559California2,055 words

Opinion

Opinion

Tashima, J.

Plaintiff William Fuller (“Fuller”), an admitted alcoholic, brought this action under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (the “Act”). He claims that his termination from employment as a letter carrier by defendant, the Postmaster General (the “Postal Service”), constituted handicap discrimination because the Postal Service failed to “reasonably accommodate” his alcoholism. The district court concluded that there was no genuine issue of fact as to whether the Postal Service had reasonably accommodated Fuller’s alcoholism and granted summary judgment in defendant’s favor. We agree with the district court and affirm.

BACKGROUND

Fuller is an admitted alcoholic. By his own testimony, he generally drank a pint of hard liquor and several six-packs of beer each day during the height of his drinking problem. He would begin drinking early in the morning and would continue drinking throughout the day.

Fuller’s problems at the Postal Service began in 1976, when he was excessively absent and took excessive sick leaves. In response, Fuller’s supervisor referred him to the Postal Service’s Employee Assistance Program (“EAP”), early in 1977. The EAP was the Postal Service’s in-house counseling…

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.