Diabetic employee gets ADA case sent to jury

The benign headline above is covering up an ongoing dispute among the 17 judges in the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals (which covers Texas). The question: Should more or fewer employment cases get sent to a jury trial? The mechanism for weeding them out is called summary judgment (dismissal without a trial). Some judges favor trials while others prefer dismissal. Here is a case following the first school of thought and illuminating for Texas employers how a court decides whether to send a case to trial. The case provides a road map for employees on what to do and for employers on what to avoid.

Employee suffers diabetic attack at work

Arlicia Gosby is a diabetic. She was hired in March 2018 by Apache Industrial Services for a six-month gig in the building or dismantling of scaffolds. On April 26, 2018, she suffered a diabetic attack at work. She was taken to the medical tent at work for treatment, and her supervisor was informed of the matter.

Just a few days later, on May 2, Gosby and 11 other employees were let go in a reduction in force (RIF). She sued under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and the trial court essentially said: “Well, RIFs happen, and she got caught up in it. There is no claim because there is nothing for a jury to decide. And after all, you, Ms. Gosby, were one of 11. Stuff happens, and this time it happened to you. Sorry.”

Main question: Why?

Here is a fundamental rule of life: The more you have to explain, the worse off you are. (Or, to paraphrase Desi Arnaz as he would chide Lucy: “Lucy, you got some explaining to do!”)