You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Donna Braunling v. Countrywide Home Loans Inc., a New York Corp. Cathy Kister, an Individual

Citations: 220 F.3d 1154; 2000 Daily Journal DAR 8099; 10 Am. Disabilities Cas. (BNA) 1429; 2000 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6089; 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 17512; 2000 WL 1005887Docket: 98-56929

Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; July 21, 2000; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The case involves an appeal by an employee, Braunling, against Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., following a summary judgment in a disability discrimination lawsuit under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and California's Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA), along with a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress. Braunling, diagnosed with multiple sclerosis (MS), alleged that her termination was due to disability discrimination and that her supervisor's conduct caused emotional distress. The district court ruled in favor of Countrywide, finding that Braunling did not demonstrate she was qualified for her position or that her termination was due to disability discrimination. The court also found that the conduct she experienced did not meet the legal standard for intentional infliction of emotional distress, as it was not extreme or outrageous. Additionally, Braunling's inability to link her performance issues to a lack of reasonable accommodation weakened her case. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment, noting the applicability of federal discrimination case law to FEHA and dismissing the need to address preemption by the California Workers' Compensation Act.

Legal Issues Addressed

Disability Discrimination under ADA and FEHA

Application: The plaintiff must demonstrate she is disabled, qualified for her position, and suffered an adverse employment action due to her disability to succeed in a discrimination claim under the ADA.

Reasoning: For ADA claims, the plaintiff must demonstrate she is disabled, qualified for her position, and suffered an adverse employment action due to her disability.

Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress in Employment

Application: The conduct must be extreme and outrageous to support a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress. Mere discomfort or rudeness does not meet this threshold.

Reasoning: Braunling must show that the defendant's conduct was extreme and outrageous, exceeding societal norms. Previous cases highlight that rude or insensitive behavior does not meet this threshold.

Qualification for Employment Position

Application: The court determined that the plaintiff was unqualified for the senior underwriting supervisor role, as her performance issues were not linked to her disability or lack of accommodation.

Reasoning: Braunling was determined to be unqualified for the senior underwriting supervisor position, as she failed to link her reduced performance to Countrywide's supervision under Kister.

Reasonable Accommodation under ADA

Application: An employer must provide reasonable accommodations unless it poses undue hardship. The plaintiff must show that such accommodations are possible.

Reasoning: Under the ADA, an employer must provide reasonable accommodations unless it poses undue hardship. The plaintiff must show that such accommodations are possible, with reassignment to another position typically considered a reasonable accommodation.