Connolly

Connolly v. Entex Information Services, Inc.

Good Law
27 F. App'x 876
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 13, 2001No. 00-35534; D.C. No. CV 99-00082-GMKCalifornia838 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Appellant Joseph A. Connolly III (“Connolly”) appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to Entex Information Services, Inc. (“Entex”) in Connolly’s disability discrimination action brought pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. (“ADA”) and Oregon Revised Statutes § 659.436. Connolly alleged that Entex discharged him from his position as Senior Customer Engineer because of his disability, which consisted of Attention Deficit Disorder (“ADD”), Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (“ADHD”), depression, and As-perger’s Syndrome, a form of autism. En-tex countered that Connolly was terminated for low productivity after numerous warnings and his refusal to transfer to a different job that Entex offered. We affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Entex.

Connolly joined the Desktop Support team after performing successfully for the trial period of 120 days in another group, the WinWin team. While in the Desktop Support team, he had several conversations with managers regarding his performance and his failure to close the number of tickets required by the department (approximately 18-20 per…

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.