Employee with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder was not disabled
with respect to the major life activities of learning and speaking.
Calef v. Gillette Co., 322 F.3d 75
(1st Cir. March 11, 2003) - Fred Calef was a Production Mechanic for Gillette from 1989 to
1996. Over the years, he was involved in several verbal and physical altercations with
supervisors and co-workers. Eventually a "final warning" was issued and he began
therapy, which resulted in him being diagnosed with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity
Disorder (ADHD). He was terminated in December of 1996 after a confrontation with a
co-worker led Calef's supervisor (and others) to fear him due to his irrational behavior.
Calef then filed this ADA action. The theory of his case is not that the ADHD causes him
to become angry, but that the ADHD makes it difficult for him to handle stressful
situations. The district court granted summary judgment for Gillette. On appeal, the First
Circuit affirms. Calef was not disabled with respect to the major life activities of
learning and speaking -- even though his doctor gave an affidavit parroting the language
of the ADA. Alternatively, even if Calef were disabled, he would not be a qualified
individual because it is an essential job function of a production manager (sic) that he
be able to handle stressful situations without making others feel threatened for their own
safety. Senior Circuit Judge Bownes concurs in part and dissents in part.
