Warner v. Aurora Public Schools

Filing 43

ORDER Denying 34 Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment, by Judge Richard P. Matsch on 11/10/15. (ktera)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Senior Judge Richard P. Matsch
Civil Action No. 14-cv-02359-RPM
ANN WARNER
PLAINTIFF,
v.
AURORA PUBLIC SCHOOLS,
DEFENDANT.
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Defendant Aurora Public Schools (“APS”) moves for summary judgment on plaintiff
Ann Warner’s claim of an intentional violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act of
1990, as amended. Defendant argues that Warner cannot establish a prima facie case of
discrimination under that statute because she is not qualified, with or without an
accommodation, to perform the essential functions of the APS paraeducator job from which
she was terminated.
APS argues that the ability to lift and/or move up to 50 pounds is an “essential
function” of an APS paraeducator’s job duties. It is undisputed that Warner has permanent
physical restrictions prohibiting her from lifting and/or moving more than 15 pounds with
both arms together or more than five pounds using just her right arm. Accordingly, APS
contends that Warner is not qualified for the position of an APS paraeducator. Warner
argues that the ability to lift and/or move up to 50 pounds is not an essential function of an

1

APS paraeducator’s job duties and that she could fulfill all of her duties as an APS
paraeducator with her restrictions.
APS challenges Warner’s qualifications solely on the basis of Warner’s inability to
lift and/or move up to 50 pounds. Therefore, the crux of the summary judgment motion is
whether the ability to lift and/or move up to 50 pounds is an essential function of the position
of an APS paraeducator. Determining whether a particular activity is an essential function of
an employment position is a factual inquiry. Davidson v. Am. Online, Inc., 337 F.3d 1179,
1191 (10th Cir. 2003). On the presented facts, a reasonable jury could determine that the
ability to lift and/or move up to 50 pounds is not an essential function of an APS
paraeducator’s job duties.

IT IS ORDERED THAT
defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment, Doc. 34, is DENIED.

DATED:

November 10, 2015
BY THE COURT:
s/Richard P. Matsch
______________________
Richard P. Matsch
Senior District Judge

2