United States District Court, W.D. Louisiana, Lake Charles Division
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
KATHLEEN KAY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
litigation, Katy Credeur (“Credeur”) is suing her
former employer, St. Charles Gaming Company, LLC d/b/a Isle
of Capri Casino (“Isle of Capri”), for
discrimination, harassment, unlawful and retaliatory
discharge under the Americans with Disabilities Act
(“ADA”). Doc. 1. Before the Court is a Motion for
Summary Judgment [doc. 13]; a Motion to Seal Documents [doc.
14], and a Motion for Hearing on the Motion for Summary
Judgment [doc. 15], filed by the defendant, Isle of Capri.
Credeur filed a response in opposition to the Motion for
Summary Judgment. Doc. 22. Isle of Capri filed a reply in
support of its Motion for Summary Judgment. Doc. 23.
matter has been referred to the undersigned for review,
report, and recommendation in accordance with 28 U.S.C.
§ 636. Doc. 26. For the reasons stated below, IT
IS RECOMMENDED that the Motion for Summary Judgment
[doc. 13] be DENIED, the Motion to Seal
[doc. 14] be DENIED, and the Motion for
Hearing [doc. 15] be DENIED AS MOOT.
Capri is an entertainment and gaming establishment in Lake
Charles, Louisiana. Doc. 13-2, Exh. A, para. 3. Credeur was
hired by Isle of Capri as a hostess in September 2014. Doc.
1, para. 3; doc. 13-2, exh. A, para. 4. In early September
2015, Credeur was hospitalized due to mental health issues,
causing her to miss work. Doc. 1, para 5; doc. 13-2, exh. A,
para. 4. Prior to returning to work, Credeur was required to
return completed medical leave of absence forms to Isle of
Capri, including a “Healthcare Provider Questionnaire,
” to be completed by her treating physician for the
purpose of determining what accommodations Credeur may
require upon returning to work. Doc. 13-2, exh. A, paras. 4,
September 10, 2015, Isle of Capri claims that it received an
incomplete Healthcare Provider Questionnaire and a note from
Credeur's treating physician which stated that Credeur
suffered from anxiety and depression and that certain aspects
of her job contributed to her condition. Doc. 13-2, exh. A,
para. 6 (citing appendix 1). On September 10 or 11, 2015,
Credeur spoke with the Human Resources Coordinator for Isle
of Capri (the “HR Coordinator”), Lena Cryar. Doc.
13-2, exh. A, para. 9, appendix 2; doc. 22-2. The HR
Coordinator told Credeur that she could not return to work
until her doctor provided further information, setting a
deadline of September 25, 2015. Doc. 22-2, para. 4; doc.
13-2, exh. A, para. 9, appendix 2. Credeur was told that she
could use the time in the interim to “apply for
transfer to a position, if available, that can suite [sic]
your need.” Doc. 13-2, exh. A, appendix 2. The same
day, the HR Coordinator drafted a letter to Credeur's
physician, stating that Isle of Capri was “unable to
release [Credeur] to her position until we have further
clarification, ” and setting forth instructions for
completing the attached Healthcare Provider Questionnaire.
Doc. 13-2, exh. A, para. 9, appendix 3.
parties dispute the subsequent events. Isle of Capri claims
they ultimately received a completed Healthcare Provider
Questionnaire stating that Credeur would have “reduced
occupational efficiency and impaired concentration;”
suggesting “ten minute breaks every two hours and an
option to transfer to a position with less personal
interaction;” and indicating that Credeur could return
to work as of September 10, 2015. Doc. 13-2, exh. A, para. 10
(citing appendix 4). According to Isle of Capri, Credeur
never contacted anyone at Isle of Capri “to work out
the details of her return” after they received the
completed forms from her physician. Doc. 13-2, exh. A, paras.
10-11. Instead, Credeur called the Strategic Development
Manager, Cristina Lorio, on September 24, 2015 to tell her
that “she was resigning her employment due to her
medical condition.” Doc. 13-2, exh. A, para. 11.
According to the Strategic Development Manager, she asked
Credeur “to confirm her resignation in writing, ”
which Credeur did the next day, September 25, 2015. Doc.
13-2, exh. A, para. 12 (citing appendix 6)
however, claims that after her September 10 or 11, 2015,
meeting with Cryar she was unable to reach her doctor for an
additional medical release, so she contacted her employer and
was told that Isle of Capri considered her
“unfit” for employment. Doc. 22-2, para. 5.
According to Credeur, the Strategic Development Manager told
her “that if [Credeur] ever wanted to have the option
for employment with [Isle of Capri] in the future [she] had
to resign or else [she] would be terminated and ineligible
for any future employment.” Doc. 22-2, para. 6. Credeur
claims that Isle of Capri did not allow her to return to work
after September 10, 2015; did not offer to transfer her to a
new position; and did not allow her “to attempt to work
with the accommodations suggested by [her] treating
physician.” Doc. 22-2, paras. 7-9.
April 26, 2016, Credeur filed her Complaint against Isle of
Capri alleging “discrimination and harassment, as well
as unlawful and retaliatory discharge under the [ADA].”
Doc. 1, para. 9. On January 4, 2017, Isle of Capri filed a
Motion for Summary Judgment, arguing that: (1) Credeur cannot
make out a claim for constructive discharge because she
voluntarily resigned her employment, and (2) Credeur cannot
make out a claim for failure to accommodate because she
failed to meaningfully engage in the interactive process to
find an accommodation. Doc. 13-2, p. 11. On the same day,
Isle of Capri filed a Motion for Hearing on its Motion for
Summary Judgment [doc. 15] and a Motion to Seal documents it
filed in connection with its Motion for Summary Judgment
because they contain sensitive medical information. Doc. 14.
On January 18, 2017, Credeur filed a response in opposition
to the Motion for Summary Judgment claiming that it is too
early to move for summary judgment because discovery has only
just begun, and asserting the existence of disputed questions
of material fact based on the differing account of events in
her affidavit and the affidavit of Isle of Capri's
Strategic Development Manager, which Credeur also claims
contains statements not based on personal knowledge. Doc. 22,
pp. 1-5. On January 31, 2017, Isle of Capri filed a reply in
support of its Motion for Summary Judgment asserting that
Credeur did not rebut the material evidence submitted by Isle
of Capri, nor did she cite any record evidence beyond that
cited by Isle of Capri that shows there is a genuine dispute
as to a material fact. Doc. 23, pp. 1, 4-5.
Motion for Summary Judgment
judgment is appropriate where “the movant shows that
there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the
movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). “A fact is material only when it
might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law,
and a fact is genuinely in dispute only if a reasonable jury
could return a verdict for the nonmoving party.”
Fordoche, Inc. v. Texaco, Inc., 463 F.3d 388, 392
(5th Cir. 2006) (citing Anderson v. Liberty Lobby,
Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986)). The moving party bears
the initial burden of showing that there is an absence of a
genuine issue of material fact. Celotex Corp. v.
Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323 (1986). After such a showing,
the burden shifts to the non-movant to show that there is a
genuine factual issue for trial by citing specific evidence
in the record, beyond the pleadings, that supports its
assertions that a material fact is genuinely in dispute.
Id.at 324; see also Diaz v. Kaplan Higher Educ.,
L.L.C.,820 F.3d 172, 176 (5th Cir. 2016) (citing
Ragas v. Tenn. Gas Pipeline Co., 136 F.3d 455, 458
(5th Cir. 1998)). The court may not weigh evidence or make