Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Tennessee v. Beverly McMahon
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, No. 16-6498 · judgment June 27, 2017
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Question presented
Respondent was a public health nurse working in petitioner’s health department. She suffered from depression and anxiety. She asked for leave of indefinite duration. Her physician’s letter stated that it was “not possible to predict” when she could return. Petitioner wrote respondent explaining that there were unpaid leave days available under the rules but that her current request must be denied because it was for “indefinite duration.” Respondent never asked for any of the allowable unpaid leave days and never provided a return-to-work date. Instead, she resigned, stating that she “should not be working for [petitioner] at this time.” The question presented is: Whether a disabled employee who only requests indefinite leave by the time of termination is not qualified under the ADA, as a matter of law, as the First, Fifth, Eighth, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits have concluded – or whether, in such situations, an employee’s qualification under the ADA is essentially a question of fact, as the Sixth Circuit has concluded.
Counsel of record
For petitioner
John Brooks Fox
Metro Nashville Department of Law
For respondent
Brian Thomas Boyd
Law Office of Brian T. Boyd
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Amicus briefs
1 cert-stage
Proceedings
- Apr 16 2018Petition DENIED.
- Mar 28 2018DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/13/2018.
- Mar 23 2018Reply of petitioner Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County, Tennessee filed.
- Mar 12 2018Brief of respondent Beverly McMahon in opposition filed.
- Mar 07 2018Brief amici curiae of International Municipal Lawyers Association, et al. filed.
- Feb 07 2018Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 12, 2018)