## Facts

- Glenn Cassimy was hired by the Rockford Public School District in 1995 as an elementary school principal and later received positive evaluations at other principal posts.
- In 2001, he was transferred to serve as principal of Washington Communication Academy, where he had responsibilities including staff supervision, discipline, curriculum and staff development, scheduling, teacher evaluations, and building operations.
- Teachers and the union complained about his performance at Washington, including concerns that student discipline was uncontrolled, referrals were not processed adequately, he was insufficiently available to staff, and the master schedule was inadequate.
- Cassimy experienced stress and was diagnosed with major depression; he requested and received leaves of absence and some schedule-related adjustments.
- The Board reassigned Cassimy from a principal/administrative role to a teaching position, which he viewed as a demotion and retaliation for requesting accommodation and complaining of discrimination.
- Cassimy sued under the ADA alleging failure to accommodate his depression and retaliation; the district court granted summary judgment to the Board, and Cassimy appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether Cassimy produced sufficient evidence that his depression made him “disabled” under the ADA (including actual disability, record of disability, or being regarded as disabled).
2. Whether, if he were disabled, the Board failed to provide reasonable accommodation in violation of the ADA.
3. Whether Cassimy produced sufficient evidence that the Board’s stated reason for reassignment (performance dissatisfaction) was a pretext for ADA retaliation.

## Decision

- The Seventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the Board.
- Cassimy failed to show he had an ADA-qualifying disability because the record supported, at most, a temporary condition that did not substantially limit a major life activity.
- The failure-to-accommodate claim failed because the duty to accommodate arises only for a qualified individual with an ADA disability; the record also reflected that the Board granted some requests for leave.
- Assuming protected activity and an adverse action, the Board articulated a legitimate, non-retaliatory reason—performance-based dissatisfaction—and Cassimy did not present evidence from which a reasonable jury could find that reason was pretextual.

## Legal Principles

- Under the (pre-ADAAA) ADA standard applied, a temporary or short-term impairment that does not substantially limit a major life activity generally is not a statutory disability.
- An employer’s obligation to provide reasonable accommodation exists only if the employee proves he is a qualified individual with a disability under the ADA.
- In ADA retaliation cases, it is not enough to dispute the employer’s assessment; the plaintiff must present evidence that the proffered reason is dishonest or not the real reason, and that retaliation was the actual motive.

## Conclusion

The court held that Cassimy’s depression did not meet the ADA’s disability definition on the record presented and that, even if he engaged in protected activity, he failed to show the Board’s performance-based explanation for reassigning him was pretext for retaliation; summary judgment for the Board was affirmed.


Cassimy v. Bd. of Educ. of the Rockford Pub. Schs., Dist. No. 205, 461 F.3d 932 (7th Cir. 2006)