Tenth Circuit: Assessing Job Qualifications at Prima Facie Stage of ADA Claim Proper and Necessary | Practical Law

Tenth Circuit: Assessing Job Qualifications at Prima Facie Stage of ADA Claim Proper and Necessary | Practical Law

In Kilcrease v. Domenico Transportation Co., the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit held that an employee pursuing a claim under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) must present credible evidence at the prima facie stage of the case that he was qualified to perform the job at issue.

Tenth Circuit: Assessing Job Qualifications at Prima Facie Stage of ADA Claim Proper and Necessary

by Practical Law Labor & Employment
Published on 26 Jul 2016 • USA (National/Federal)
In Kilcrease v. Domenico Transportation Co., the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit held that an employee pursuing a claim under the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) must present credible evidence at the prima facie stage of the case that he was qualified to perform the job at issue.
On July 12, 2016, in Kilcrease v. Domenico Transportation Co., the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit held that an individual pursuing an ADA claim must present credible evidence at the prima facie stage of the case that he was objectively qualified to perform the job he was rejected for. The court dismissed a rejected job applicant's ADA claim and held that the district court properly considered whether the applicant presented evidence showing that he satisfied a key requirement of the position. ( (10th Cir. July 12, 2016).)

Background

Mark Kilcrease, a commercial truck driver with a rare form of cancer, applied for a truck driving position with Domenico. Among the listed requirements for the position was "three years of verifiable mountain driving." On the pre-application questionnaire that Kilcrease filled out he indicated that he had the requisite three years of mountain-driving experience. Domenico rejected Kilcrease's application for the truck driving position, informing Kilcrease that it had done so because Domenico's health insurance company would not cover Kilcrease because of his cancer diagnosis.
After Kilcrease filed a disability discrimination charge under the ADA, Domenico stated that it rejected Kilcrease's application not because of his medical condition but because he lacked three years of mountain-driving experience that Domenico claimed was a requirement made by its auto insurance carrier. Kilcrease ultimately filed a lawsuit in US district court. The district court granted summary judgment to Domenico, holding that Kilcrease was not a "qualified individual" under the ADA because the undisputed facts clearly showed that he had less than three years of mountain-driving experience. Kilcrease appealed to the Tenth Circuit.

Outcome

The Tenth Circuit affirmed, holding that:
  • An individual pursuing an ADA claim must present credible evidence at the prima facie stage that he was objectively qualified to perform the job for which he was rejected.
  • The district court properly considered the evidence that Kilcrease did not have three years of mountain-driving experience and therefore:
    • was not qualified for the position under the ADA; and
    • could not establish a prima facie case of disability discrimination.
The Tenth Circuit noted that:
The Tenth Circuit found that:
  • Its decision in Kenworthy v. Conoco, Inc.:
    • did not preclude a court from considering, at the prima facie stage of an ADA discrimination claim, whether a prospective employee was qualified for the position; and
    • held only that courts may not consider an employer's claim that an employee was less qualified for the position than the employee who was hired or promoted.
    (979 F.2d 1462, 1470 (10th Cir. 1992).)
  • At the prima facie stage of an ADA discrimination claim, the plaintiff:
    • must present at least some evidence that he was qualified for the position; and
    • need not establish that he was able to meet all of the employer's objective requirements for the position.
    (EEOC v. Horizon/CMS Healthcare Corp., 220 F.3d 1184, 1193 (10th Cir. 2000).)
  • The district court found that Kilcrease did not present any evidence that he had three years of mountain-driving experience, as Domenico required for the position.

Practical Implications

The Tenth Circuit's decision in Kilcrease holds that consideration of a prospective employee's qualifications for a position is appropriate and necessary at the prima facie stage of an ADA discrimination case. Even in a case where the employer appeared to make statements suggesting that the prospective employee was rejected for the job because of his disability, the employer still obtained summary judgment based on the prospective employee's failure to produce evidence showing that he met a key qualification for the position. Employers within the Tenth Circuit should take note of this decision as a potentially effective basis for defeating an ADA claim. Employees suing under the ADA should review the holding and ensure they have sufficient support to demonstrate job qualification.