HURLEY BURISH, S.C.
33 EAST MAIN STREET, SUITE 400
MADISON, WISCONSIN 53703

Call us at (608) 257-0945

info@hurleyburish.com

Pay Your Invoice Here

  • About Us
  • Services
    • Business, Commercial & Real Estate
    • Civil Litigation
    • Criminal Defense
      • Felony and Misdemeanor Allegations
      • Drunk Driving and Traffic Offenses
      • University Discipline and Underage Drinking
    • Estate Planning & Elder Law
    • Family Law
    • Mediation & Arbitration
    • Professional Discipline
    • White Collar Defense
  • Our Team
    • Abigail Carey
    • Jonas B. Bednarek
    • Cricket R. Beeson
    • Marcus J. Berghahn
    • Joseph A. Bugni
    • Mark D. Burish
    • Peyton B. Engel
    • Andrew W. Erlandson
    • Stephen P. Hurley
    • David E. Saperstein
    • Daniel J. Schlichting
    • Catherine E. White
  • Directions

Call us at (608) 257-0945

info@hurleyburish.com

Pay Your Invoice Here

  • About Us
  • Services
    • Business, Commercial & Real Estate
    • Civil Litigation
    • Criminal Defense
      • Felony and Misdemeanor Allegations
      • Drunk Driving and Traffic Offenses
      • University Discipline and Underage Drinking
    • Estate Planning & Elder Law
    • Family Law
    • Mediation & Arbitration
    • Professional Discipline
    • White Collar Defense
  • Our Team
    • Abigail Carey
    • Jonas B. Bednarek
    • Cricket R. Beeson
    • Marcus J. Berghahn
    • Joseph A. Bugni
    • Mark D. Burish
    • Peyton B. Engel
    • Andrew W. Erlandson
    • Stephen P. Hurley
    • David E. Saperstein
    • Daniel J. Schlichting
    • Catherine E. White
  • Directions

Authors: Attorney John C. Mitby & Law Clerk Elizabeth L. Spencer
Phone: 608-575-4077
Email: jmitby@hbslawfirm.com

In the recent case Whitaker v. Wisconsin Department of Health Services, 849 F.3d 681 (7th Cir. 2017), the Seventh Circuit refused to revive a fired employee’s suit stating that she did not establish that she was an “otherwise qualified” employee under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 29. U.S.C. § 794. Notably, the Seventh Circuit reiterated that regular attendance can be an essential function of an employee’s position. The Court did not overturn the motion for summary judgment in favor of the Department as the employee failed to provide evidence that she was able to return to work, with or without a reasonable accommodation, after several months of consecutive leave.

After suffering a back injury, Whitaker was transferred from a more active position to that of an economic support specialist for Milwaukee County. In 2009, the Wisconsin Department of Health Services assumed administration over Milwaukee County’s public assistance program making Whitaker an employee of the Department. Beginning in the summer of 2010, Whitaker took several consecutive leaves of absence. At times, she clearly indicated that the leave was due to her disability but at other times it was unclear. After requesting more leave, the Department informed her that her FMLA leave would be exhausted on October 18, but that her contract provided an additional 30 days of unpaid leave. The Department informed her that if she did not return to work it would begin the termination process. Whitaker submitted 2 additional vague notes from her doctor requesting leave. After a meeting on November 30, her employment was terminated.

Whitaker commenced this action arguing that the Department violated the Act by rejecting her request for an accommodation of “finite, unpaid leave.” The District Court granted summary judgment in favor of the Department stating that Whitaker failed to provide evidence that she could perform the essential functions of her position with or without an accommodation.
Whitaker appealed the District Court’s decision to the Seventh Circuit. To succeed in challenging the motion for summary judgment, Whitaker needed to present evidence that, if believed by a trier of fact, would establish each of the elements of the Act claim. These elements included showing that despite her disability she was otherwise qualified to perform her job. The Seventh Circuit concluded that Whitaker failed to present evidence to demonstrate that she was “otherwise qualified.” An employee is “otherwise qualified” when she is able to perform the essential functions of her position either with or without a reasonable accommodation. While there are some exceptions, for the purposes of the Rehabilitation Act, regular attendance is an essential function of many jobs. Whitaker’s work required her regular attendance to fulfill her duties.

The Court stated that Whitaker failed to offer sufficient evidence that she was able to perform this essential function even with a reasonable accommodation. The provided doctors’ notes were uninformative and the Seventh Circuit had previously found that notes were insufficient to support a reasonable accommodation. Whitaker also provided a self-serving affidavit stating that she would have been able to return to work at the end of December. While this type of declaration is a legitimate method of introducing facts on summary judgment, the Court stated it did not provide sufficient evidence to allow a trier of fact to find that if the Department gave her more leave, she would have been able to return to work. The Court stated in the affidavit, Whitaker failed to explain the effectiveness of the treatment or the medical likelihood that it would enable her to return to work.

This case reminds employers that for many employees regular attendance would be considered an essential function of a job. For employees, it is a reminder that even with mandated leave for issues covered by the FMLA that they must be able to demonstrate that they can return to work.

SCOTUS Tosses a Bone to the In...
Attorney Saperstein’s 20...

About author

About Author

HBS Admin

Other posts by HBS Admin

Related posts

2024 Super Lawyers – Hurley Burish, S.C.

November 22, 2024
Hurley Burish, S.C. is pleased to announce Wisconsin Super Lawyers and Rising Stars magazine named 4 attorneys to the 2024 list. Attorney Stephen J. Hurley... Continue reading

COVID-19 Funeral Assistance Approved Via FEMA

February 9, 2021
Author: Attorney Tom VercauterenPhone: 608-257-0945Email: tvercauteren@hurleyburish.com On Monday, February 8, 2021, US Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Chuck Schumer announced that part of the December... Continue reading

COVID and INSURANCE EXCLUSIONS

February 2, 2021
Author: Attorney John MitbyPhone: 608-257-0945Email: jmitby@hurleyburish.com With the current worldwide pandemic, it is a good time to check your commercial insurance policy and any recent... Continue reading

2020 Wisconsin Super Lawyers and Rising Stars

January 11, 2021
Hurley Burish, S.C. is proud to announce that we have seven attorneys selected to the 2020 Wisconsin Super Lawyers and Rising Stars list. Congratulations to... Continue reading

COVID-19 Exposure, Insurance Exclusions, and Tort Liability: Will Wisconsin be Next to Provide Additional Protections?

September 24, 2020
Author: Attorney John C. MitbyPhone: 608-257-0945Email: jmitby@hurleyburish.com There is a serious problem with COVID-19 pandemic-related claims. Insurers are refusing to provide coverage due to exclusions... Continue reading

Comments are closed

SEARCH

Phone: (608) 257-0945

RECENT ARTICLES

  • What Can the Circuit Court Do While I’m Appealing My Conviction? March 20, 2025
  • 2024 Super Lawyers – Hurley Burish, S.C. November 22, 2024

ACCOMPLISHMENTS

TierOneBadgeHurley Burish, S.C. recognized as Tier One Law Firm in the 2021 U.S. News & World Report-Best Lawyers® Law Firm Rankings.

Learn More

ABOUT US

Dedicated to providing clients with the comprehensive, creative, and thorough work expected of large firms, HurleyBurish also maintains the personal working relationships and cost-effectiveness associated with smaller firms.

Learn More

  • Charitable Contributions
  • Newsroom
  • Services
  • About Us
  • Directions
  • Our Team

© 2025 Hurley Burish, S.C. All Rights Reserved.