Login


Notice: Passwords are now case-sensitive

Remember Me
Register a new account
Forgot your password?
Case Name Vanderheiden v. City of Alameda
Date 06/02/2009
Note [Unpublished] There are genuine issues of fact regarding plaintiff's psychological health and his ability to perform his job.
Citation A120169
WCC Citation WCC 35302009 CA
The City claims Vanderheiden called a station meeting in which he put other employees "on notice" that they should leave him alone. The City insisted that Vanderheiden receive psychological counseling through the Employee Assistance Program (EAP) before he could return to work. The City moved for summary judgment on grounds that (1) Vanderheiden could not prove the City "regarded him" as mentally disabled under the FEHA; (2) the City had engaged in good faith in any interactive process required of it; (3) the City had offered Vanderheiden a reasonable accommodation; and (4) Vanderheiden could not perform the essential duties of a firefighter. Although the court found it "likely" the City did regard Vanderheiden as mentally disabled, it granted summary judgment to the City because Vanderheiden had presented insufficient evidence that he could perform the essential functions of the job. Dr. Everstine originally produced no records underlying her opinion to either the City or Vanderheiden, as Vanderheiden had refused to sign a release.

Download full case here.