Case: EEOC v. DAIMLER CHRYSLER CORPORATION

2:01-cv-72130 | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan

Filed Date: June 6, 2001

Closed Date: Nov. 22, 2004

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

In June 2001, the EEOC's Detroit office filed this suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan against Daimler Chrysler Corporation alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Specifically, the EEOC alleged that the defendant declined to hire an applicant for a mechanic position because of the results of a pre-employment medical exam. The applicant had documentation of knee-replacement surgery in his medical record, which the employer had access to. A…

In June 2001, the EEOC's Detroit office filed this suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan against Daimler Chrysler Corporation alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Specifically, the EEOC alleged that the defendant declined to hire an applicant for a mechanic position because of the results of a pre-employment medical exam. The applicant had documentation of knee-replacement surgery in his medical record, which the employer had access to. As it turns out, however, the applicant had trouble understanding the spoken English of the examiner and when asked whether he could bend, stoop or crouch he indicated that he could not. The failure to communicate caused the applicant to be rejected and precipitated this ADA claim based on the "regarded as" disabled standard ñ that is, that the applicant was rejected based on his medical records and not based on his actual physical limitations.

The defendant moved for summary judgment in March 2002 and was granted it May 2002. On appeal, the judgment was affirmed by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals because the EEOC failed to prove that the defendant rescinded its offer of employment based on a "record of" disability. Essentially, in spite of the communications mix up between medical examiner and applicant, the defendant was acting in good faith when it rescinded the offer of employment rather than unlawfully discriminating based on the applicants actual record of disability.

Summary Authors

Jason Chester (8/23/2007)

People


Judge(s)

Bell, Robert Holmes (Michigan)

Martin, Boyce Ficklen Jr. (Kentucky)

Rogers, John M. (District of Columbia)

Judge(s)

Bell, Robert Holmes (Michigan)

Martin, Boyce Ficklen Jr. (Kentucky)

Rogers, John M. (District of Columbia)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

02-02361

USCA Docket [PACER]

EEOC v. Daimler Chrysler, et al

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Nov. 8, 2004

Nov. 8, 2004

Docket

2:01-cv-72130

Docket [PACER]

EEOC v. Daimler Chrysler

Nov. 22, 2004

Nov. 22, 2004

Docket
25

2:01-cv-72130

Order [Regarding Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment]

EEOC v. Daimler Chrysler Corporation

May 20, 2002

May 20, 2002

Order/Opinion
30

2:01-cv-72130

Order [Regarding Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration]

EEOC v. Daimler Chrysler Corporation

Sept. 12, 2002

Sept. 12, 2002

Order/Opinion

02-02361

Appellate Decision

EEOC v. Daimler Chrysler Corporation

U. S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

111 Fed.Appx. 394

Sept. 15, 2004

Sept. 15, 2004

Order/Opinion

Resources

Docket

Last updated July 23, 2022, 3:05 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT; jury demand - Receipt # usa (nh) (Entered: 06/11/2001)

June 6, 2001

June 6, 2001

2

NOTICE by plaintiff EEOC of withdrawal by Ellen Ha as attorney for EEOC . (cf) (Entered: 06/28/2001)

June 27, 2001

June 27, 2001

3

APPEARANCE for plaintiff EEOC of attorney Krystal M. Gardner; proof of mailing (jg) (Entered: 08/06/2001)

Aug. 3, 2001

Aug. 3, 2001

4

ANSWER by defendant, Daimler Chrysler, to complaint [1-1]; with proof of mailing (jg) (Entered: 08/09/2001)

Aug. 8, 2001

Aug. 8, 2001

4

AFFIRMATIVE defenses by defendant Daimler Chrysler (jg) (Entered: 08/09/2001)

Aug. 8, 2001

Aug. 8, 2001

5

NOTICE of scheduling conference for 2:30 pm on 10/9/01 (lg) (Entered: 09/12/2001)

Sept. 10, 2001

Sept. 10, 2001

SCHEDULING conference held - Judge Nancy G. Edmunds (ch) (Entered: 10/09/2001)

Oct. 9, 2001

Oct. 9, 2001

6

STIPULATION by the parties, request for mediation [EOD Date: 10/11/01] (lg) (Entered: 10/11/2001)

Oct. 9, 2001

Oct. 9, 2001

7

PRETRIAL scheduling order by Judge Nancy G. Edmunds - setting deadline for witness list for 12/15/01 , setting deadline for discovery for 2/15/02 , setting deadline for filing dispositive motions for 3/15/02 , setting deadline for final pretrial order for 7/18/02 , setting final pretrial conference for 2:00 7/25/02 , setting civil jury trial for 9:00 8/1/02 (lg) (Entered: 10/11/2001)

Oct. 9, 2001

Oct. 9, 2001

8

WITNESS list by plaintiff EEOC with proof of mailing (nh) (Entered: 12/18/2001)

Dec. 14, 2001

Dec. 14, 2001

9

APPEARANCE for defendant Daimler Chrysler of attorney Lawrence J. Murphy (nh) (Entered: 01/10/2002)

Jan. 2, 2002

Jan. 2, 2002

10

WITNESS list by defendant Daimler Chrysler (nh) (Entered: 01/10/2002)

Jan. 2, 2002

Jan. 2, 2002

11

PROOF of mailing by defendant Daimler Chrysler of items 9-10 (nh) (Entered: 01/10/2002)

Jan. 2, 2002

Jan. 2, 2002

12

ORDER by Judge Nancy G. Edmunds of referral to Mediation Tribunal Association , setting final pretrial conference for 7/25/02 and setting civil jury trial for 8/1/02 ; proof of mailing [EOD Date 2/25/02] (jg) (Entered: 02/25/2002)

Feb. 21, 2002

Feb. 21, 2002

13

SUPPLEMENTAL witness list by defendant Daimler Chrysler; with proof of mailing (dp) (Entered: 03/11/2002)

March 8, 2002

March 8, 2002

15

NOTICE of setting hearing on motion for summary judgment by Daimler Chrysler [14-1] for 2:00 5/8/02 (cm) (Entered: 03/21/2002)

March 20, 2002

March 20, 2002

16

ORDER by Judge Nancy G. Edmunds with stipulation, setting deadline for response to motion for summary judgment by Daimler Chrysler [14-1] for 4/12/02 [EOD Date: 3/26/02] (kg) (Entered: 03/26/2002)

March 20, 2002

March 20, 2002

17

ORDER by Judge Nancy G. Edmunds, with stipulation, re- setting deadline for response to motion for summary judgment by Daimler Chrysler [14-1] for 4/19/02 [EOD Date: 4/19/02] (jg) (Entered: 04/19/2002)

April 18, 2002

April 18, 2002

18

RESPONSE by plaintiff EEOC to motion for summary judgment by Daimler Chrysler [14-1] with proof of mailing (kg) (Entered: 04/22/2002)

April 19, 2002

April 19, 2002

19

EXHIBITS 1-18 filed by plaintiff EEOC in support of motion response [18-1] (kg) (Entered: 04/22/2002)

April 19, 2002

April 19, 2002

20

MOTION by defendant DaimlerChrysler Corp to file reply in excess of page limit (kg) (Entered: 04/30/2002)

April 30, 2002

April 30, 2002

21

PROOF of service by defendant DaimlerChrysler Corp of reply brief by mail (kg) (Entered: 04/30/2002)

April 30, 2002

April 30, 2002

22

ORDER by Judge Nancy G. Edmunds with stipulation granting motion to file reply in excess of page limit by DaimlerChrysler Corp [20-1] [EOD Date: 5/2/02] (LS) (Entered: 05/02/2002)

May 1, 2002

May 1, 2002

23

REPLY by DaimlerChrysler Corp to response to motion for summary judgment by DaimlerChrysler Corp [14-1] with attachments A-E (LS) (Entered: 05/02/2002)

May 1, 2002

May 1, 2002

24

PROOF of service of [22-1] (kg) (Entered: 05/07/2002)

May 6, 2002

May 6, 2002

MOTION hearing held on motion for summary judgment by DaimlerChrysler Corp [14-1] - disposition: taken under advisement - Judge Nancy G. Edmunds - Court Reporter: Suzanne Jacques (ch) (Entered: 05/08/2002)

May 8, 2002

May 8, 2002

25

ORDER by Judge Nancy G. Edmunds granting motion for summary judgment by DaimlerChrysler Corp [14-1]; proof of service [EOD Date 5/21/02] (jg) (Entered: 05/21/2002)

May 20, 2002

May 20, 2002

26

JUDGMENT entered by Judge Nancy G. Edmunds for defendant and complaint is dismissed; proof of service [EOD Date: 5/21/02] (jg) (Entered: 05/21/2002)

May 20, 2002

May 20, 2002

27

MOTION by plaintiff for reconsideration of order [26-1] with brief, exhibits 1-5, request for hearing and proof of service (cm) (Entered: 06/05/2002)

June 4, 2002

June 4, 2002

28

ORDER by Judge Nancy G. Edmunds, setting deadline for response to motion for reconsideration of order [26-1] by EEOC [27-1] for 8/7/02 [EOD Date 7/22/02] (cm) (Entered: 07/22/2002)

July 19, 2002

July 19, 2002

29

RESPONSE by DaimlerChrysler Corp to motion for reconsideration of order [26-1] by EEOC [27-1] with attachments and proof of mailing (lg) (Entered: 08/08/2002)

Aug. 7, 2002

Aug. 7, 2002

31

APPEAL by plaintiff EEOC of orders [30-1], [26-1] and [25-1] to USCA - FEE: not paid (do) (Entered: 11/13/2002)

Nov. 8, 2002

Nov. 8, 2002

32

PROOF of service of appeal notice [31-1] to USCA, counsel and court reporter of record (do) (Entered: 11/13/2002)

Nov. 13, 2002

Nov. 13, 2002

33

CERTIFIED copy of appeal notice by EEOC [31-1] and docket transmitted to USCA (do) (Entered: 11/13/2002)

Nov. 13, 2002

Nov. 13, 2002

34

TRANSCRIPT order form by plaintiff EEOC regarding appeal notice by EEOC [31-1] requesting transcript(s) of: 5/8/02 -appeal case # 02-2361 (lh) (Entered: 12/03/2002)

Dec. 2, 2002

Dec. 2, 2002

35

TRANSCRIPT taken on 5/08/02 of motion for summary judgment (kb) (Entered: 02/14/2003)

Feb. 13, 2003

Feb. 13, 2003

36

(Not Certified) ORDER from USCA re [31] Notice of Appeal filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission - affirmed. [Appeal Case Number 02-2361] (LBeh, ) (Entered: 09/24/2004)

Sept. 20, 2004

Sept. 20, 2004

37

MANDATE of USCA as to [31] Notice of Appeal filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission - affirmed. [Appeal Case Number 02-2361] (LBeh, ) (Entered: 11/23/2004)

Nov. 22, 2004

Nov. 22, 2004

Case Details

State / Territory: Michigan

Case Type(s):

Equal Employment

Special Collection(s):

EEOC Study — in sample

Key Dates

Filing Date: June 6, 2001

Closing Date: Nov. 22, 2004

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, on behalf of one or more workers.

Plaintiff Type(s):

EEOC Plaintiff

Attorney Organizations:

EEOC

Public Interest Lawyer: Yes

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: No

Class Action Outcome: Not sought

Defendants

Daimler Chrysler Corporation, Private Entity/Person

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12111 et seq.

Availably Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Defendant

Nature of Relief:

None

Source of Relief:

None

Issues

General:

Disparate Treatment

Discrimination-area:

Hiring

Discrimination-basis:

Disability (inc. reasonable accommodations)

EEOC-centric:

Direct Suit on Merits