Wallace v. Koch Foods of Ashland LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

EASTERN DIVISION

SONYA WALLACE,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 1:21-cv-1292-CLM

KOCH FOODS OF ASHLAND,

LLC,

Defendant.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Sonya Wallace (“Wallace”) sues Koch Foods of Ashland, LLC

(“Koch Foods”) for Disparate Treatment (Count One); Retaliation (Count

Two); and Failure to Accommodate (Count Three) under the Americans

with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) (42 U.S.C. § 12112) and ADA Amendments

Act of 2008 (“ADAAA”) (42 U.S.C. § 12101). Koch Foods moves for

summary judgment. (Doc. 31). For the reasons stated within, the court

GRANTS Koch Foods’ motion. (Doc. 31).

BACKGROUND

1. Wallace’s Work and Medical History Before Koch Foods

Wallace worked for Tyson Foods (“Tyson”) at its poultry plant in

Ashland, Alabama. Wallace began having right wrist pain in 1999, so

Tyson sent her to the doctor in October 2000. The doctor placed Wallace

on work restrictions that restricted the use of both hands. Two months

later, Wallace was diagnosed with carpal tunnel syndrome. (Doc. 33, p.

4). Wallace had carpal tunnel surgery in January 2001, and remained on

work restrictions until March 2001. In May 2001, she returned to her

regular job. At some point, Wallace left Tyson and began a new job at the

City of Talladega. In 2007, Koch Foods bought the Ashland poultry plant

from Tyson.

2. Wallace’s First Application for Employment with Koch Foods

When Koch Foods offers an applicant a job, the offer is conditional

on the applicant passing a medical assessment. This assessment helps

determine whether the employee can perform the essential functions of

their position, with or without a reasonable accommodation, at the time

of their hiring. (Doc. 33, pp. 6-7); (Doc. 38, pp. 21-22). During the medical

assessment, the applicant completes a “Post Offer Medical Assessment”

(“POMA”) form that asks: “Have you ever received medical treatment for

any of the following?” followed by several medical conditions.

Wallace applied to work for Koch Foods in April 2019 and received

a conditional job offer. So Wallace completed the POMA form. Wallace

checked the boxes indicating that she had no prior medical treatment for

her wrists; no prior hand or finger problems; no prior pain or weakness

in her wrists; no prior medical treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome; no

prior medical treatment for numbness, tingling of hands or fingers; no

prior work injuries; and no prior work restrictions. When asked to

indicate any prior surgeries, Wallace did not lst her carpal tunnel

surgery.

After an applicant completes the POMA form, the nurse assesses

the applicant’s fingers, thumbs, wrists, hands, shoulders, neck, knees,

and back. Koch Foods’ nurse, Pamela McCullers, circled “WNL” (within

normal limits) for each body part on Wallace’s form. Wallace says that

she told Nurse McCullers of her previous carpal tunnel surgery during

this physical exam, even though neither she nor Nurse McCullers wrote

it on her form. At the bottom of the POMA form, the applicant must

certify that the information stated is true and acknowledge that

falsification is grounds for discharge. Wallace did so:

I realize that any evidence of falsification, misrepresentation or omission of this

health history and health record will be considered grounds for discharge, I certify

that I have answered all questions truthfully and heve not knowingly withheld any

information concerning questions about my health, either past or present.

Sir gwellate | □□□ wey —

Applicant Skjpnatuge Date

A a ed eT

(Doc. 382-2, p. 20). Wallace signed multiple forms on April 4, 2019 during

her first application process with Koch Foods:

(1) the POMA form with all findings from her medical examination

with Nurse McCullers,

(2) an “Essential Job Function Qualification” form,!

(3) a “Hiring Practices and No Rehire List’?, and

(4) the Koch Foods Rules of Conduct which state:

See,

é

KOCH FOODS

olebarinietre a (Beir heat Tyrrel

RULES OF CONDUCT —TYPE 1 (Reviewed 1-2-18)

VIOLATIONS OF THE FOLLOWING RULES WILL BE GROUNDS FOR IMMEDIATE

TERMINATION (EVEN ON THE FIRST OFFENSE),

1. The possession, storage of, use, or presence in the system of alcohol, drugs, or other controlled

substance (including illegal use or disbursement of prescription drugs).

2. Refusing to submit to a drug or alcohol test.

3. Filing a fraudulent worker’s compensation claim.

4. Falsifying Company employment or pay documents or any other work-related document, or making

false representations verbally or in writing.

5. Theft of any product, Company property, or another person's property.

6. Any act of sabotage.

7. Becoming involved in a crime, an accessory to crime, or withholding information concerning a crime.

&. Creating a hostile work environment or otherwise violating the Company's anti-harassment and anti-

discrimination policy.

9. Willful refusal to follow reasonable instructions or directions of a supervisor or manager.

10. Intentional or reckless acts, including horseplay or practical jokes, which endanger employees or

causes destruction of Company property.

Ll. Possession or use of firearms or other weapons on Company property or while on duty.

12. Possession or use of dangerous materials or intoxicants on Company property or while on duty

without authorization.

13. Job abandonment,

14. Fighting or provoking a fight (DO NOT PLACE HANDS ON OTHER PEOPLE OR USE

PROVOKING LANGUAGE).

15. Making false or malicious statements to harm or destroy the reputation, authority, or official standing

of an employee, the Company, or its products.

16. Falsification of any work record, time clock punch, report, document, form, application, etc.

17. Sleeping on the job.

18. Unauthorized use of Company-leased or -owned equipment, tools, or machinery.

19. Gambling on Company premises.

20. Use of Profanity towards employees, supervisors, management, visitors, vendors, or customers.

21. Threats of violence or terrorism toward anyone.

22. Serious misconduct that is, or is not, covered in this policy.

23. Smoking in any Koch Foods facility or in any area other than designated outside areas.

1 On this form Wallace checked off that there were no essential job functions that she couldn’t

presently perform without an accommodation, but she wrote separately that she could not

perform the “live hang” position. According to Nurse McCullers, “live hang” is where the

employee physically places the live bird on the shackle to kill it, which is one of the hardest

jobs because it is rough on the hands. Wallace never performed the live hang position at Koch

Foods.

2 This list outlined hiring procedures for the application process, Human Resources (HR)

screening and orientation, the medical/safety assessment, and the reasonable accommodation

process.

(Doc. 33, p. 8); (Doc. 32-2, p. 22). Once Wallace signed off on these forms

and completed the application process, she was qualified to attend

orientation. But Wallace did not return to work at Koch Foods after

orientation in 2019 because her father passed away. (Doc. 38, p. 4).

3. Wallace’s Second Application, Employment, and Medical History

at Koch Foods in 2020

In June 2020, Wallace reapplied for a position with Koch Foods.

She went through the same application process, once again completing

the POMA form and undergoing a medical examination with Nurse

McCullers.

Wallace completed the forms exactly as she had in 2019. She again

checked the boxes indicating that she had no prior medical treatment for

her wrists; no prior hand or finger problems; no prior pain or weakness

in her wrists; no prior medical treatment for carpal tunnel syndrome; no

prior medical treatment for numbness, tingling of hands or fingers; no

prior work injuries; and no prior work restrictions. When asked about

prior surgeries, Wallace again failed to list carpal tunnel surgery.

Wallace says she had no pain in her hands during the medical

examination and believed she would not have issues holding a knife.

(Doc. 38, p. 15).

Nurse McCullers again selected “WNL” (within normal limits)

when she examined Wallace for each of the listed body parts. Again,

Wallace signed the POMA form, certifying the information stated was

true, and acknowledging that falsification is grounds for discharge:

I realize that any evidence of falsification, n isreprese siscicn ;

heath story an Neat aaa rearepresntation or oasson ofthis

that t have answered all questions truthfully ahd have mit knowliily allBinete ant

infprmation concerning questions about my health, either amiorncaie oe

~ ) hy t_bd [22 fe Ow

Aoollcant Aogeabuege == —— - __ ls = Pe a

ye —-_— Dats

Nurse fA AM f bo 2 Ck)

(Doc. 32-2, p. 45); (Doc. 33, pp. 9-10). Wallace was again qualified to

attend orientation, and she started work on June 28, 2020.

Koch Foods is organized by a union and a collective bargaining

agreement (CBA), meaning the company must undergo a bidding process

for employee transfers or promotions. (Doc. 33, p. 11). Wallace was

initially placed in General Labor but wanted to change positions. So she

bid on and was selected for the “Sorter Helper” position. According to

Wallace’s supervisor, Carolyn Richey, the Sorter is required to hold a

chicken in one hand and a knife in the other and use a repetitive motion

to remove wings, legs, or other parts from the chicken. Wallace worked

in this position for about three months before she began experiencing

pain in her left hand in September 2020. Wallace went to see Nurse

McCullers several times complaining of pain in her hands. (Doc. 38, p.

11; Doc. 38, p. 16).

On October 12, 2020, Nurse McCullers sent Wallace to the doctor

with the Sorter Helper job description. She asked for the doctor to

approve or disapprove Wallace working that position, considering her

hand pain. The doctor disapproved of the Sorter Helper position and

wrote back that Wallace had a diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome in

her left hand. (Doc. 32-2, p. 53; Doc. 38, p. 12; Doc. 38, pp. 17-18).

4. Koch Foods’ Internal Communication About Wallace

On October 13, 2020, Nurse McCullers sent two emails. First, she

sent an email that the doctor denied the Sorter Helper job description:?

From: MeCullers, Parnela

Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2020 12:34 AM

Ta: Young, Rickey; Campbell, Thomas; Hawkins, Jeffery; Richey, Carolyn; Smith, John

Subject; Sonya Wallace

Sonya's job description was denied. We are sending her out with a different one. She can only pull guts at this time. She

will have a follow up next week.and I'll update you more than.

8 According to Richey, “pulling guts” is the job description for the “Correlator’” position. In this

position, employees use both hands to remove the bird’s windpipe and internal organs that the

draw machine leaves behind. (Doc. 38, p. 24). So when the doctor disapproved of the Sorter

Helper job description, Wallace began the Correlator job (which she later said caused her more

pain than Sorter Helper).

Second, Nurse McCullers sent an email about Wallace’s interest in

getting short-term disability and informing HR personnel that Wallace

was scheduled for surgery October 27, 2020:

From: McCullers, Pamela

Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2020 1:56 AM

To: Harris, Tracy ; Hanners, Tasha ; Smith, John

Subject: Sonya Wallace

Sonya gave verbal consent to discuss her medical condition with HR.

FYI... Sanya has been here for 4 months. She said she has carpal tunnel and is supposed to have surgery Oct. 27". She

wanted to know what she needed to do for short term Disability. | told her to call Tracy and get her to tell her.

Tracy Harris, Benefits Administrator, responded that she could

place Wallace on non-FMLA leave. She gave the number for Wallace to

call to apply for short-term disability, but said if Wallace had carpal

tunnel before her enrollment date, FMLA would not cover her carpal

tunnel syndrome:

From: Harris, Tracy

Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2020 9:26 AM

To: MecCullers, Pamela; Hanners, Tasha; Smith, John

Subject: RE: Sonya Wallace

She hasn't worked here a year so she will not quallfy for FMLA. | can place her ona non-FMLA leave.

she will néed to call PMLA (1-877-734-3652) to receive a denial and to apply for short term. However, she may not

recelve it because she was just enrolled on 09-01-2020 and if she had carpal tunnel prior to this date It will be

considered pre-existing. Just an FY.

On October 16, 2020, Wallace’s doctor disapproved of Wallace

working in the Correlator position.

On October 18, 2020, Wallace’s direct supervisor, Carolyn Richey,

was not at work. Evalina Davis, assistant supervisor, placed Wallace in

the “Bird Turner” position’ which did not hurt Wallace’s hand that

night.

On October 19, 2020, Wallace gave Nurse McCullers a note from

her doctor. The note stated that Wallace was scheduled for surgery on

4 According to Richey, “bird turner” turns the birds before they go into the draw machine and

only requires the bird turner to “pat the bird,” flipping it to face the correct direction. (Doc. 38,

p. 19).

October 27, 2020, and she would be out of work for 6 to 8 weeks. Nurse

McCullers told Wallace the doctor disapproved of the Correlator position.

Then Nurse McCullers sent Wallace home until the surgery. With the

pain in her hands, Wallace didn’t think she could perform any other job

before the surgery. So she didn’t argue with Nurse McCullers’s

suggestion that she go home. (Doc. 33, p. 18).

On October 20, 2020, Nurse McCullers sent an email detailing her

October 19 conversation with Wallace:

From: McCullers, Pamela <Pamela.McCullers@kochfoods.com=>

Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2020 1:11 AM

To: Benefield, Margaret <Margaret.Benefield@kochfoods.coms>; Harris, Tracy <Tracy.Harris@kochfoods.com>; Hanners,

Tasha <Tasha.Hanners@kochfoods.com>; Smith, John <John.Smith@kochfoods.com>

Subject: FW: Fax Received from CSID: 2562369775 - Pages received: 2

Sonya Wallace phone number i you need to call her.

Her 1* and 2™ job description was disapproved. She was sent home until after her surgery on the 27" per her MD. She

said she already talked to HR about an non fmla leave. | gave her a job description to be approve for when she came

back after surgery. She said she didn’t want that job and was going to get it disapproved. | told her that after her surgery

the goal was supposed to be that she was 100 percent and could do any job out here. She said she knew what to do

because last time the nurse told her. | asked her what she was talking about. Supposedly, as Tyson she had a work injury

and was dx with caporal tunnel then. She had surgery on her right wrist. | asked her did she tell us on the physical. She

said yes she thought. | looked and she didn’t. She tried to say, she told me during the physical. | told her | would have

written it down. Plus, carpal tunnel and wrist issue are questions and she marked no. She also marked no, for a work

injury. She then said she guess she forgot. | told her by law, | would have to send it to HR. She told me that was fine for

me to do my job. She said, that she didn’t think short term was going to pay her anyways so she was dropping that as

soon as she could. | told her that Tracy might have known she had a preexisting dx that | was unaware of. That Tracy

worked here when it was Tyson’s and might remember. That all | could tell her was to da what everyone already tald

her. To call tomorrow and make sure HR knew she was out now instead on the 27" so she could be on Non LOA. To call

Tracy about the short term and upon returning she would have to have job description approved and doctor's excuse

returning her without any restrictions. She asked if | was firing her because of the other that she needed insurance for

the surgery. | told her | didn’t fire people period. That HR could call her about that but to do the other stuff so she didn’t

get into trouble. She thanked me and left.

Tracy Harris responded:

From: Harris, Tracy

Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2020 9:26 AM

To: McCullers, Pamela; Benefield, Margaret; Hanners, Tasha; Smith, John

Ce: Cisne, Randy

Subject: RE: Fax Received from CSID: 2562369775 - Pages received: 2

| DON’T remember anything about her when she worked for Tyson. | didn’t know if she had a preexisting dx or not.

When | spoke to her after you told her to call me she said she had carpel tunnel in her left hand. | explained to her how

short term disability is filed and told her that if she had been dx and or treated for it 3 months prior to her insurance

effective date it may not cover it, AS □□□ □□ her previous work/comp surgeries or anything about her for that matter... no

| don’t remember,

I've done what | need to do therefore | do not need to call her. She is eligible for a non-FMLA for up to 3 months if HR

decides to retain her. She falsified documents and that is a terminating offence but | (like you) don't make those

decisions.

| have already spoken to her about the short term and informed her that the only way she would know if she qualified is

to file a claim | don’t make those decisions either.

Tracy

5. Wallace’s Termination from Koch Foods

Margaret Benefield (HR Manager) received the two October 20

emails. That day, Benefield and Zabrina Davis (HR Clerk) signed

Wallace’s Personnel Action Form that Wallace was discharged for

falsifying documents.

NEW EMPLOYEE / INFORMATION CHANGE

Employee Name: Sonya Wallace Discharged 4] Resigned () Retired [J

|Mailing Address Deceased Lay Off oO

Clty: sive: Zip: Effective Date : Wednesday, October 21, 2020

Marital Status : Sex: Birth Date: Lest Day Worked Monday, October 19, 2020

SS #: Work Auth. Exp, : Pay Through : Monday. October 19, 2020

Rate of Pay : Dept# 100413 Ecoc: Prorated Vacation Amount

Job Code & Title : Evis Re-Employ? yes (] sol) Conditional

Filing Status : FederalExempt; State Exempt: ( Explain Reason Below }

iL MASTER CHANGES

Promotion [_| Transfer [_] Review [] RateChange [_] Contact: a

other

Ome se Falssifying documents

FROM To

Status er i a he

Process Level zat a

Deparment lina ey

Shit

Salary Class Initiated By: Zabrina Davis Date: 10/20/20

Rate of Pay Supervisor = Date

Job Code Employee Date

New Job Title Dept. Head Date

Previous Job Title Personnel MGR: (JL keh Date: ze ap

Previous Review Date Yo Ine: General MGR: Date :

Next Review Date Other Data :

(Doc. 32-4, p. 77).

On October 21, 2020, Wallace spoke with Everlina Inu (Benefits

Department) and was approved for short-term disability for her surgery.

That same day, on a phone call, Benefield informed Wallace she was

being terminated for falsifying information on her job application.

Benefield said that Wallace had a carpal tunnel diagnosis and prior

surgery while at Tyson Foods that she failed to disclose. Wallace never

returned to work for Koch Foods. On November 7, 2020, she received a

formal termination letter:

Sonya Wallace

L1/o4r2020

Dear Sonya:

Koch Foods is a service oriented company and a recognized leader in the poultry

industry. In order to maintain this position, it is imperative that every employee follows

company policies.

According to company Rules of Conduct, type 1 number 17, falsification of any work

record is grounds for immediate discharge. Therefore, in accordance with company

policy, your employment with Koch Foods was terminated effective 1021/2020,

We understand that there may be extenuating circumstances. If so, please comtact us

when ali matters have been settled, so that we may review ‘your rehire eligibility and

determine if employment opportunities are available.

The above notification will be placed in your performance file in absentia, In addition, a

copy of the Disciplinary Action will also be recorded, If you have any questions, please

give me a call at (256) 354-1948.

Regards,

Zabrina Davis

Human Resources Generalist

(256) 354-1927

(Doc. 32-6, p. 98) (circle added).

Wallace now sues Koch Foods for Disparate Treatment (Count

One); Retaliation (Count Two); and Failure to Accommodate (Count

Three), all under the ADA/ADAAA. Koch Foods has moved for summary

judgment on all claims. (Doc. 31).

STANDARD OF REVIEW

Summary judgment is appropriate only when the moving party

shows there is no genuine issue of material fact, and the moving party is

entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a). A fact is

material if it is one that might affect the outcome of the case. Anderson

v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). To avoid summary

judgment, the nonmoving party must go beyond mere allegations to offer

specific facts creating a genuine issue for trial. Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(e); see

also Anderson, 477 U.S. at 324. In reviewing a motion for summary

judgment, this court views the facts and draws all reasonable inferences

in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. See Cuesta v. Sch.

Bd. of Miami-Dade Cty., 285 F.3d 962, 966 (11th Cir. 2002).

DISCUSSION

The parties present many arguments under the McDonnell

Douglas burden-shifting framework. But the Eleventh Circuit has

recently steered away from McDonnell Douglas at the summary

judgment stage and toward the simpler, Rule 56-based question: Is there

a “sufficient evidentiary basis for the jury to find that the defendant

intentionally discriminated against the plaintiff?” Tynes v. Fla. Dep’t of

Juv. Just., 88 F.4th 939, 947 (11th Cir. 2023) (citing Cleveland v. Home

Shopping Network, Inc., 369 F.3d 1189, 1194 (11th Cir. 2004)). And “an

employee may present circumstantial evidence—in any form—that

creates a reasonable inference of retaliation.” Berry v. Crestwood

Healthcare LP, 84 F.4th 1300, 1311 (11th Cir. 2023).

So, for each claim, the court (1) considers the parties’ evidence on

both sides, then (2) determines whether a jury, viewing that evidence,

could reasonably infer that Koch Foods intentionally discriminated

against Wallace because of her disability.

I. Wallace’s Disparate Treatment and Retaliation Claims

(Counts One and Two)

Wallace presents the same evidence for her disparate treatment

and retaliation claims. So the court considers the evidence for both

claims together.®

Koch Foods’ Evidence: Koch Foods says that it terminated Wallace

because she falsified work documents, which is grounds for immediate

termination (even on the first offense) per the Rules of Conduct. (Doc. 33,

pp. 16-18). Koch Foods’ Rules of Conduct support this nondiscriminatory

reason for terminating Wallace:

€

eocH roops

RULES OF CONDUCT —TYPE 1 (Reviewed I-18

VIOLATIONS OF THE FOLLOWING RULES WILL BE GROUNDS FOR IMMEDIATE

TERMINATION (EVEN ON THE FIRST OFFENSE).

1. The possession, storage of, use, or presence in the system of alcohol, drugs, or other controlled

substance (including illegal use or disbursement of prescription drugs).

2. Refusing to submit to a drug or alcohol test.

3. Filing a fraudulent worker’s compensation claim.

4. Falsifying Company employment or pay documents or any other work-related document, or making

false representations verbally or in writing.

5. Theft ofany product, Company property, or another person's property.

6. Any act of sabotage.

7. Becoming involved in a crime, an accessory to crime, or withholding information concerning a crime.

8. Creating a hostile work environment or otherwise violating the Company's anti-harassment and anti-

discrimination policy,

9. Willful refusal to follow reasonable instructions or directions of a supervisor or manager.

10. Intentional or reckless acts, including horseplay or practical jokes, which endanger employees or

causes destruction of Company property,

11. Possession or use of firearms or other weapons on Company property or while on duty.

12. Possession or use of dangerous materials or intoxicants on Company property or while on duty

without authorization.

13. Job abandonment.

14. Fighting or provoking a fight (DO NOT PLACE HANDS ON OTHER PEOPLE OR USE

PROVOKING LANGUAGE).

15. Making false or malicious statements to harm or destroy the reputation, authority, or official standing

ofan emptoyer, te Company, or its products.

6. Falsification of any work record, time clock punch, report, document, form, application, etc.

-~aleeping on the job.

Unauthorized ise o panyteased-e_—esvned saute ent -teers;-o aCHincry.

19. Gambling on Company premises.

20. Use of Profanity towards employees, supervisors, management, visitors, vendors, or customers.

21. Threats of violence or terrorism toward anyone.

22. Serious misconduct that is, or is not, covered in this policy.

23, Smoking in any Koch Foods facility or in any area other than designated outside areas.

5 Although the parties dispute whether Wallace has established a prima facie case (of both

disparate treatment and retaliation), the question before the court is whether there is

sufficient evidence of intentional discrimination. See Tynes, 88 F.4th at 947 (emphasis added).

11

(Doc. 32-2, p. 22) (circles added). Koch Foods says it has not treated

Wallace any differently than other employees because it has terminated

29 employees, including Wallace, for this same offense since 2016. (Doc.

38, pp. 26-27; see Doc. 32-4, p. 74 (list of all 29 employees)). And Koch

Foods shows that Wallace admitted she falsified her application because

she thought her medical history would disqualify her from working at

Koch Foods:

4 Q. So you remembered that one, but

5 you didn't -- you didn't put the carpal

6 tunnel, did you?

7 A. I sure didn't.

8 Q. Ms. Wallace, isn't it correct that

9 you didn't -- you didn't disclose to Koch

10 Foods any of your prior issues with your

11 wrists, hands, fingers, your carpal tunnel,

12 your numbness, your tingling, any of your

13 prior on-the-job mjuries, any of your prior

14 work restrictions, any of your prior

15 workers’ comp claims because you thought it

16 would disqualify you from being able to work

17 at Koch Foods?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. Isn't that nght?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. And that's why you did it, isn't

22 it? That's why you lied on your

23 questionnaire; isn't that right?

Page 133

1 MR. EDWARDS: Object to form. Yo!

2 can answer, Ms. Wallace.

3 A. Yes.

(Doc. 32-1, p. 34). Further, Koch Foods presents emails between Nurse

McCullers and Benefield in HR stating that when Wallace told Nurse

McCullers in October 2020 of her previous carpal tunnel diagnosis and

surgery, it was the first time either McCullers or Benefield learned of it.

And Nurse McCullers’ email stated that this information was not

disclosed on Wallace’s medical forms, leading them to realize Wallace

had falsified her application. (Doc. 32-5, p. 62).

Koch Foods also shows that its decision to terminate Wallace was

made after her benefits were being approved. Wallace says Koch Foods’

Benefits Department notified her she was approved for short-term

disability for her surgery on October 21, 2020 (doc. 6, p. 8, 4 58), which

12

Koch Foods shows was after HR signed Wallace’s Personnel Action Form

discharging her for falsifying documents. (Doc. 32-4, p. 77). And before

that, the emails between Nurse McCullers and Tracy Harris show that

Harris had determined Wallace was eligible for non-FMLA leave for up

to 3 months and told Wallace how to file the claim for short-term

disability. (Doc. 32-5, p. 62).

Wallace’s Evidence: Wallace says Koch Foods terminated her when

she requested time off for carpal tunnel surgery, thus regarding her as

disabled and subjecting her to adverse treatment based on her disability.

(Doc. 6, pp. 5-9; Doc. 38, pp. 32-33). Wallace emphasizes that she told

Nurse McCullers of her previous carpal tunnel surgery during her

physical exam, so Koch Foods knew about her hand pain and hired her

anyway.6 (Doc. 38, pp. 5-14). But she says things changed when

McCullers learned that Wallace needed 6 to 8 weeks off work for

surgery. (Doc. 38, p. 45) (“On October 13, 2020, McCullers knew Wallace

was scheduled for surgery on October 27, 2020, but did not know until

October 19, 2020, that the doctor was requesting she be out of work for 6

to 8 weeks.”). Wallace says the timing is suspicious because Nurse

McCullers and Tracy Harris only began discussing that Wallace had

falsified documents upon learning of the time she would be out of work.

Id. And she says Koch Foods should have investigated whether she had

previously disclosed her carpal tunnel surgery and diagnosis. (Doc. 38, p.

12).

Analysis: To avoid summary judgment, Wallace must go beyond

mere allegations to offer specific facts creating a genuine issue for trial.

Anderson, 477 U.S. at 324. And considering these facts, the court must

determine “whether there is enough evidence to show that the reason for

[Wallace’s termination] was illegal discrimination.” Tynes, 88 F.4th at

947 (emphasis added).

Wallace admits that she lied to Koch Foods about her past surgery

to ensure she was offered a job. And the evidence shows that, at some

point, Koch Foods discovered that Wallace had falsified documents—an

6 Nurse McCullers denies this allegation. But at the Rule 56 stage, the court views the

testimony in the light most favorable to Wallace. Cuesta, 285 F.3d at 966.

offense Koch Foods has fired many employees for, and an offense that

constitutes a legitimate reason to terminate an employee. Patterson v.

Ga. Pac., LLC, 38 F.4th 1336, 1352 (11th Cir. 2022).

Wallace fails to present enough evidence to allow a juror to find

that Koch Foods instead fired her because of, or in retaliation for, her

disability—rather than for lying about it. The only factual evidence

Wallace offers is a close temporal proximity between Koch Foods

learning Wallace would be out of work for 6 to 8 weeks and terminating

her. But “temporal proximity by itself generally cannot prove that an

employer’s proffered reasons are pretextual.” Todd v. Fayette Cnty. Sch.

Dist., 998 F.3d 1203, 1219 (11th Cir. 2021).

Further, because Wallace is the non-moving party, the court will

assume that Koch Foods did not investigate her termination. But it did

not have to do so. Benefield could rely on a good-faith belief that Wallace

had falsified employment records when Nurse McCullers’s email

suggested Wallace did so and when Benefield confirmed so with a review

of Wallace’s employment record. (Doc. 32-4, pp. 28-29). Benefield did not

need to prove her belief was correct before she terminated Wallace. See

EEOC v. Total Sys. Servs., Inc., 221 F.3d 1171, 1176 (11th Cir. 2000).

Because Koch Foods has put forth a legitimate, nondiscriminatory

reason for Wallace’s termination that she cannot prove is pretextual,

there is insufficient evidence for a jury to find that Koch Foods’ reason

for terminating Wallace was illegal discrimination. So the court

GRANTS Koch Foods’ motion for summary judgment on Wallace’s

disparate treatment and retaliation claims.

II. Wallace’s Failure to Accommodate Claim (Count Three)

Koch Foods’ Evidence: Koch Foods says that Wallace never

requested an accommodation. It says that Wallace didn’t request to send

her job descriptions to the doctor, but that Nurse McCullers did so to

learn if Wallace could still perform the essential functions of her job

without pain. And Koch Foods says that when the doctor denied both the

Sorter and Correlator job descriptions, Wallace did not request to be

placed in another position. Instead, Koch Foods shows that Wallace

thought that she should go home until her surgery:

Q: — And you did not ask to stay at work until your surgery, did you?

A: No, ma'am.

Q: Okay. So it was okay with you to go out until after you had

your surgery?

A: Yeah.

Q: Okay.

A: Yes, ma‘am.

(Doc. 32-1 at p. 62, Dep. 243:12-19)

Q: | -- I'm going to ask you about that. I'm asking you if this was

retaliation, the telling -- you know, you going off work till your

surgery, you having to come back without work restrictions and

having a job description approved by your doctor, was any of that

a problem to you?

A: No, ma'am.

Q: You thought that was handled properly?

A: It was handled properly.

(Doe. 32-1 at p. 62, Dep. 245:1-18)

(Doc. 42, p. 12; Doc. 38, p. 36-37). Koch Foods also shows that Wallace

admitted she never requested an accommodation from HR:

20 Q. And that they had outlined a way

21 for you to request a reasonable

22 accommodation if you needed it for a

23 disability; 1s that right?

Page 141

1 A. Right.

2 Q. And that you needed to contact the

3 complex HR manager; 1s that nght?

4 A. Yes.

5 @Q. Did you ever contact Mr. Randy

6 Cisne, the complex HR manager, about any

7 type of accommodation that you needed?

& A. No, ma'am.

(Doc. 32-1, p. 36).

15

20 ~Okay. You know before when we 1 Q. Okay. And you -- and you never

21 were looking through the policy about if you 2 did ask, right?

22 needed an accommodation so you could do your 3 A. No, ma‘am.

23 job duties? 4 Q. Okay. Other than bringing in your

Page 257 5 surgery re -- that your doctor said you

1 A. Right. 6 needed your surgery, did you ever ask for

2 Q. Who tocall and who to ask, did 7 anything else at Koch Foods in order for you

3 you ever ask anyone at Koch Foods to do that 8 to do your job with your carpal tunnel?

4 for you with regards to your carpal tunnel? 9 A. No, ma'am.

§ A. No, ma'am.

6 Q. Okay. Did you ever ask them for

7 any kind of accommodation for your carpal

& tunnel?

9 A. Because I never go talk to nobody,

10 1 didn't know who to go talk to.

11 Q. Even though you had the policy and

12 even though it was posted in the break room

13 and there were everyone's -- not only their

14 work phone number and their cell phone

15 number, you're saying you didn't know who t

16 talk to?

17 A. IT never looked at the board. |

18 didn't. | know it was up there, but I just

19 didn't --

200 Q. But if you needed -- if you needed

21 help, you knew -- you knew where to go,

22 right?

233 A. Yeah. Yes, ma'am.

(Doc. 32-1, pp. 65-66). And Koch Foods says that even if Wallace had

requested an accommodation, it would’ve been required to follow the bid

process of its CBA to move her permanently to an open position (doc. 33,

pp. 25-26)—but that even Wallace admits that she was unaware of any

available position that she could perform with her hand pain:

17) And were you aware at any time

18 when you were working at Koch Foods your |

19 second -- second time you went there of

20 there being a -- a bid job open in the paw :

21 room that you could bid on? :

22 A. No, ma'am.

23°00 «QQ. «Okay. What other job did you :

Page 195

1 think you were able to do with the -- the

2 problems you were having with your hands

3 when you worked at Koch Foods?

4 A. Well, there's really nothing --

5 Q. Yeah.

6 <A. ~Icando.

(Doc. 32-1, p. 50). Finally, Koch Foods says Wallace may argue that she

requested leave as an accommodation. As stated above,7 Koch Foods

presents evidence that Tracy Harris told Wallace how to file a claim for

short-term disability (doc. 32-5, p. 62), and that Wallace admitted she

was approved for short-term disability for her surgery on October 21,

2020, before she was terminated. (Doc. 6, p. 8, ¶ 58). Harris also found

Wallace eligible for non-FMLA leave before her termination. (Doc. 32-4,

p. 72). So Koch Foods says it never denied Wallace an accommodation.

Wallace’s Evidence: In her amended complaint, Wallace says that

she “requested a reasonable accommodation,” but does not provide any

facts or evidence in support of this assertion. (Doc. 6, p. 14, ¶ 111). She

says that while her direct supervisor (Richey) was out one day, the

acting assistant supervisor (Davis) placed her in the bird turner position

that did not cause pain in her left hand. Id.; Doc. 38, pp. 34-35. Based on

this, Wallace says Koch Foods had the ability to place her in an

accommodating position that did not hurt her hand but terminated her

instead. (Doc. 6, pp. 14-16). She also says that injured employees can be

placed in “second processing” where they place labels and stickers on

boxes until their injury has improved, but that Koch Foods did not

provide her with this option. (Doc. 38, pp. 36-37).

Based on her supervisor Carolyn Richey’s deposition testimony,

Wallace says that, under HR’s policy, she could’ve switched jobs if she

hadn’t complained of her hands hurting—that when a complaint of pain

is made, the decision where to place an employee then switches from

Richey to the nurse and HR. (Doc. 38, p. 34; Doc. 32-8, pp. 13-15). She

also says HR never gave her any ADA documentation to complete, and

that “if Benefield would have given Wallace the ADA documentation

[when she learned of her scheduled surgery], Wallace could have been

given an accommodation to perform the basic functions of her job,

potentially place Wallace in ‘second processing,’ or putting labels on

stickers in the supply area.” (Doc. 38, p. 37).

7 See supra pp. 13-14 (Part I, Koch Foods’ Evidence).

Wallace also says that Nurse McCullers tried to find a suitable job

to accommodate Wallace twice by sending the job descriptions to her

doctor but didn’t send another job description after the first two were

denied.

Finally, Wallace argues that requesting time off can be a request

for a reasonable accommodation. See Coker v. Enhanced Senior Living,

Inc., 897 F. Supp. 2d 1366, 1379 n.10 (N.D. Ga. 2012).

Analysis: Although Wallace now suggests many accommodations

that she says would have been reasonable, she fails to present evidence

that would allow a reasonable juror to find that she requested a

reasonable accommodation before her termination.

Under Eleventh Circuit case law, failure to unambiguously

request or identify an accommodation is grounds for summary judgment

on a failure to accommodate claim. See Hudson v. Tyson Farms, Inc., 769

F. App’x 911, 918 (11th Cir. 2019); see also Byrd v. UPS, 814 F. App’x

536, 539-40 (11th Cir. 2020); see also Gaston v. Bellingrath Gardens &

Home, Inc., 167 F.3d 1361, 1363 (11th Cir. 1999) (“[T]he duty to provide

a reasonable accommodation is not triggered unless a specific demand

for an accommodation has been made . . . .”).

At this stage, Wallace must go beyond mere allegations and

provide evidence to support her assertions. Anderson, 477 U.S. at 324.

But Wallace presents no evidence for a jury to find that she ever

requested an accommodation at Koch Foods. She fails to contradict Koch

Foods’s evidence that she was satisfied with going home before her

surgery. She fails to present evidence to suggest that she requested ADA

documentation from Benefield. She fails to present evidence to suggest

that she asked Nurse McCullers to send another job description to her

doctor. And she fails to present evidence to suggest that she asked to be

placed in the “bird turner” position or in “second processing.”8

8 And even if the court were persuaded that requesting time off for surgery was a request for a

reasonable accommodation, Koch Foods accommodated Wallace when it found her eligible for

non-FMLA leave and informed her she was approved for short-term disability before her

surgery.

Wallace also fails to present evidence that would allow a

reasonable juror to find that Koch Foods could provide Wallace with

these accommodations if requested. Even if Wallace could perform the

essential functions of the “bird turner” and “second processing” positions

(and even if she were qualified for them), the record does not support the

existence of an open position in those areas. In fact, Wallace stated that

she knew of no vacancies in any position and that she couldn’t perform

any position without pain. And the ADA does not require Koch Foods to

bump another employee from a non-vacant position to accommodate

Wallace. Lucas v. W.W. Grainger, Inc., 257 F.3d 1249, 1257 (11th Cir.

2001) (citing Willis v. Conopco, Inc., 108 F.3d 282, 284 (11th Cir. 1997)).

Again, the question the court must answer is “whether there is

enough evidence to show that the reason for an adverse employment

action was illegal discrimination.” Tynes, 88 F.4th at 947 (emphasis

added). As explained, the court finds there is not. So the court GRANTS

Koch Foods’ motion for summary judgment on Wallace’s failure to

accommodate claim.

CONCLUSION

For the reasons stated within, the court GRANTS Koch Foods’

motion for summary judgment in its entirety. (Doc. 31). The court will

enter a separate order consistent with this memorandum opinion that

closes this case.

DONE and ORDERED on February 20, 2024.

/

COREY L. MAZE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

19