Wiseman
Wiseman v. County of Washoe
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Plaintiffs-appellants Charles and Christy Wiseman appeal from the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of defendants-appellees Washoe County, John MacIntyre and the so-called “Vistar defendants” (Vistar, Dean R. Hinitz, Richard M. Baldo, Betty Spruill, Ray Blanchard). The Wisemans also appeal from the award of attorney’s fees and costs to all of the defendants. We AFFIRM the judgment, but REVERSE the award of attorney’s fees and REMAND for retaxing of costs.
The parties are familiar with the facts and procedural history of the case. We have reviewed the record, and we agree with the district court that there are no triable issues of fact on the Wisemans’ federal claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Title VII of the *778 Civil Rights Act of 1964, civil RICO, 42 U.S.C. § 1983 or 42 U.S.C. § 1985 .
The ADA claim fails because the Wisemans have not shown that Mr. Wise-man’s alcoholism or post-traumatic stress disorder substantially limits him in a major life activity. See Albertson’s, Inc. v. Kirkingburg, 527 U.S. 555, 566 , 119 S.Ct. 2162 , 144 L.Ed.2d 518 (1999). The Title VII claim was properly dismissed for lack of exhaustion…