Wilson v. Dollar General Corp.

Summarized by John Bollinger , Boleman Law Firm, PC
12 years 9 months ago

Citation:

Wilson v. Dollar General et al., Case No.12-1573 (4th Cir. May 17, 2013)

Tag(s):

Ruling:

AFFIRMING the District Court, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the District Court’s granting of summary judgment in favor of Dollar General. The Court first held that a Chapter 13 Debtor has standing to bring causes of action in their own name on behalf of the estate. The Court looked to the five other circuits who had considered the question. Additionally, the Court compared the powers and roles of a Chapter 7 Trustee and the Chapter 13 Debtor. The Court concluded that the Chapter 13 Debtor has explicit powers to possess and use property and implicit within that use is standing to pursue and maintain a pre-petition cause of action. The Court also relied upon FRBP Rule 6009, which provides “the trustee or debtor in possession may prosecute or may enter an appearance and defend any pending action or proceeding by or against the debtor…” Lastly, the Court concluded that that the Debtor failed to state a prima facie case against Dollar General for failure to accommodate under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. 12101-12213 (the “ADA”). Specifically, the Court concluded that the Debtor was unable to show he could perform the essential functions of his position with a reasonable accommodation, given the facts presented.

Procedural context:

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Danville

Facts:

Debtor suffered from a detached retina in his right eye. He was employed by Dollar General and worked as a processor of inventory and loading of merchandise. His condition worsened while employed with Dollar General and required him to seek medical attention on numerous occasions and as a result, he was not able to perform his duties on the job. Notes were provided by the medical providers and in each instance, Debtor could not perform his job duties. Debtor was subsequently terminated. Debtor filed a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (the "EEOC"), prior to filing his Chapter 13 bankruptcy case. Upon the receipt of the right to sue from the EEOC, the Debtor filed suit in the district court against Dollar General for violation of the ADA. Dollar General asserted that the Debtor lacked standing to pursue the ADA claim, which the district court disagreed with and permitted the Debtor proceed. Additionally, Dollar General argued that the Debtors claim failed on the merits, the district court agreed and granted Dollar General summary judgment. Dollar General did not dispute the first two elements of the Debtor's claim under the ADA. The appeal was focused on third element, which requires that he was a qualified individual under the ADA, such that had he be given a reasonable accommodation, he could have "perform[ed] the essential functions of the employment position . . . " The Court looked at the facts presented and concluded that there were no facts in the record that supported a reasonable accommodation that would have enabled the Debtor to perform the essential functions of his position.

Judge(s):

Circuit Judges Thacker, Niemeyer and Agee

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary. Please Sign In using your ABI Member credentials. Not a Member yet? Join ABI now - it is absolutely worth it!