Employee Wins Disability Harassment Case 03-09-2005
- By Rita Risser, attorney at law

Disability harassment is rare, but when it does happen, the courts strongly enforce the laws against it. A recent California Court of Appeals case illustrates why all employees need to learn to follow the anti-harassment laws.

Ms. Carnes suffered from Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS), which left her completely paralyzed for more than a year. She later regained partial mobility, but continued to suffer from residual nerve damage such that, as of June 2000, she walked with a limp, had difficulty with stairs, would occasionally fall due to her knees giving out, and had a claw deformity in her hands. After she recovered from the initial paralysis of GBS, Carnes was diagnosed as suffering from depression, and she began taking anti-depressant medication, which she continued to take through the events underlying this lawsuit.

In June 2000, the Superior Court in Placer County hired Carnes as an account clerk. Rhonda Williamson was a co-worker in a lead position.

The work relationship between Williamson and Carnes was anything but smooth. Williamson interrupted Carnes, criticized her work, and spoke to her in a rude and condescending way. Less often, usually when no one else was present, Williamson would yell at Carnes, get uncomfortably close to her, and behave angrily. After Carnes talked to Williamson about her limited mobility, Williamson piled objects on the floor around her desk. Williamson would also remove papers and files from Carnes's desk, then throw them back on the desktop when she was done, even though Carnes asked her to put them away. Williamson also knocked over a porcelain angel Carnes had in her workspace in what appeared to Carnes to be a deliberate act, then said something like, "'Oh, I am so sorry,'" in a sarcastic tone.

The court of appeals held that this behavior, taken as a whole, could create a hostile work environment for Carnes. The Court held that from the very nature of some of the actions -- piling objects around Carnes's desk knowing she had difficulty walking and throwing papers and files on Carnes's desk knowing she had trouble using her hands -- that they could constitute acts of deliberate cruelty toward Carnes based on her physical disability. Furthermore, it could also be reasonably inferred that Williamson's other harassing behavior toward Carnes -- interrupting her, criticizing her work, speaking to her in a rude and condescending way, yelling at her, getting uncomfortably close to her, and behaving angrily toward her -- was likewise motivated by an animus toward Carnes based on her physical disability.

What you should do: This case illustrates how important it is for all employees, not just supervisors, to have anti-harassment training.

Carnes v. Superior Court (California Ct App 02/07/2005)

Information here is correct at the time it is posted. Case decisions cited here may be reversed. Please do not rely on this information without consulting an attorney first.