KAKLAMANOS v. PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY

Filing 10

ORDER denying 6 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. Signed by JUDGE RICHARD SMOAK on 8/27/2012. (jcw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

DINO J. KAKLAMANOS,
Plaintiff,
v.

CASE NO. 4:12-cv-411-RS-CAS

PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY INSURANCE
COMPANY,
Defendant.
_________________________________/
ORDER
The relief requested in Progressive’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment
(Doc. 6) is DENIED. Defendant contends that Plaintiff’s failure to reasonably
accommodate claim should be dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative
remedies. However, the Florida Commission on Human Relations (“FCHR”)
stated in its “Disputed Issues” that “Complainant alleges that, in February, April,
and May of 2011, Respondent ignored his requests to work from home as an
accommodation for his medical problems.” (Doc. 7-2, p. 11).
The Eleventh Circuit has held, “In light of the purpose of the EEOC
exhaustion requirement, we have held that a plaintiff’s judicial complaint is limited
by the scope of the EEOC investigation which can reasonably be expected to grow
out of the charge of discrimination.” Gregory v. Ga. Dep’t of Human Res., 355

F.3d 1277, 1280 (11th Cir. 2004). The Eleventh Circuit has also stated that “the
scope of an EEOC complain should not be strictly interpreted.” Id. It is clear that
the accommodation issue was present during the EEOC/FCHR administrative
investigation. Additionally, given Plaintiff’s specific complaints with the
EEOC/FCHR, a failure to accommodate claim could reasonably be expected to
grow out of his disability claim. Therefore, Defendant’s motion is DENIED.

ORDERED on August 27, 2012.
/S/ Richard Smoak
RICHARD SMOAK
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE