Samper

Samper v. PROVIDENCE ST. VINCENT MEDICAL CENTER

Good Law
675 F.3d 1233·2012 WL 1194141·26 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 11·2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 7278
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 11, 201210-35811California3,419 words

Opinion

Opinion

McKEOWN, J.

This case tests the limits of an employer’s attendance policy. Just how essential is showing up for work on a predictable basis? In the case of a neo-natal intensive care nurse, we conclude that attendance really is essential.

Monika Samper, a neo-natal intensive care unit (“NICU”) nurse, sought an accommodation from her employer, Providence St. Vincent (“Providence”), that would have allowed her an unspecified number of unplanned absences from her job. She wanted to opt out of Providence’s attendance policy, which sanctioned five unplanned absences of unlimited duration as well as other permitted absences. Samper appeals the district court’s summary judgment in favor of Providence on her reasonable accommodation claim under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”). Because regular attendance is an essential function of a neo-natal nursing position at Providence, we affirm.

Background

Providence is a medical facility in Portland, Oregon, that provides a broad range of medical services. Its NICU offers a high level of intensive care to premature infants. According to the NICU charge nurse, absences among NICU staff can jeopardize patient care: NICU nurses require…

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.