Umble

MEMORANDUM *

Linda Umble brought suit against defendants Arrowhead Community Hospital and Medical Center and Baptist Hospital and Health Systems (collectively “Arrowhead”) under the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”). The district court granted summary judgment to Arrowhead, and we affirm.

We hold that Arrowhead’s discharge of Umble did not violate the ADA.

*757 Because Arrowhead was not aware that the complaints about Umble’s behavior were linked to her migraine condition, Arrowhead was under no duty to accommodate her disability. 2 Barnett v. U.S. Air, 228 F.8d 1105, 1114 (9th Cir.2000) (en banc), cert. granted, — U.S. -, 121 S.Ct. 1600 , 149 L.Ed.2d 467 (2001). Moreover, even if we were to find that the duty to accommodate was triggered, Umble caused the breakdown of the interactive process by refusing Arrowhead’s offer of a leave of absence and failing to request an alternative accommodation. Indeed, Umble maintained throughout the termination proceedings that her job performance was satisfactory and that she did not require leave or any other accommodation to return to work. Under the circumstances, Arrowhead’s decision to terminate Umble did not violate the ADA.

We…

concurring in part and dissenting in part.

I agree with the majority’s conclusion that Arrowhead’s termination of Umble did not, in itself, constitute a violation of the ADA..However, I would hold that Umble has adequately raised the claim that Arrowhead failed to accommodate her disability in January 1996 when it threatened her with termination for attendance difficulties which it knew were caused by her migraine headaches. In her opposition to the defendants’ motion for summary judgment/cross-motion for partial summary judgment, Umble argued that Arrowhead violated the ADA in part because “it refused [her] request for a modified work schedule,” and discussed at length the reprimands threatening termination if her absenteeism continued as well as the evidence that Arrowhead was aware that her attendance problems were caused by her migraines. Umble renewed these arguments in her briefs on appeal. Although her complaint is inartfully pled, the defendants had adequate notice from Umble’s summary judgment papers that Arrowhead’s actions in January 1996 regarding her absenteeism difficulties, as well as the events leading up to her termination in September, were at issue; indeed, in…