## Facts

- Carol Doyal worked for Oklahoma Heart, Inc., a cardiology practice group, beginning in 1992; by early 1995 she served as business office manager.
- A stressful conversion to an in-house billing/accounting system coincided with Doyal experiencing major depression with anxiety attacks, including panic attacks, insomnia, and reported difficulty thinking, concentrating, learning, remembering, and interacting with others.
- After a breakdown at work, Doyal took a week off, saw a psychiatrist, was diagnosed with major depression (moderate) with anxiety attacks, and began antidepressant medication that she stated “helped tremendously.”
- On returning, Doyal requested reassignment and was moved to human resources director at reduced pay; she reported continued memory and concentration problems in that role.
- Oklahoma Heart documented concerns about Doyal’s judgment and decision-making, including an incident involving disposal of medical records, and terminated her employment in May 1995.
- Doyal sued under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), claiming she was disabled or regarded as disabled; the district court granted summary judgment for the employer, and Doyal appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether Doyal produced sufficient evidence that her depression and anxiety substantially limited one or more major life activities (including thinking, concentrating, learning, sleeping, or interacting with others) to qualify as an ADA disability.
2. Whether Doyal produced sufficient evidence that Oklahoma Heart regarded her as having an impairment that substantially limited a major life activity.

## Decision

- The Tenth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Oklahoma Heart.
- Doyal failed to raise a triable issue that she was substantially limited in any major life activity, particularly when the effects of mitigating medication were considered.
- Doyal failed to raise a triable issue that Oklahoma Heart regarded her as substantially limited in a major life activity.
- Because she did not satisfy the ADA’s definition of disability on either theory, the employer was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

## Legal Principles

- An ADA plaintiff must show an impairment that substantially limits a major life activity as compared to the average person in the general population.
- The disability analysis considers the effects of mitigating measures (including medication) on the alleged limitation.
- Mental impairments (including depression and anxiety) are not disabilities per se; the plaintiff must prove the degree, duration, and impact of limitation on a qualifying major life activity.
- Sleep, thinking, concentrating, learning, and interacting with others may qualify as major life activities, but fluctuating or moderate limitations, especially when controlled by medication, may be insufficient to show “substantial limitation.”
- “Regarded as” disability requires evidence that the employer mistakenly believed the employee’s impairment substantially limited a major life activity; viewing an employee as stressed, unhappy, or a poor performer does not alone establish this element.

## Conclusion

The court held that Doyal’s evidence showed stress-related depression and anxiety that improved with medication and did not substantially restrict major life activities, and it also showed only that her employer perceived performance and judgment problems rather than a legally cognizable disability; summary judgment for the employer was therefore proper.


Doyal v. Okla. Heart, Inc., 213 F.3d 492 (10th Cir. 2000)