Share
In Zatarain v. WDSU-Television, Inc., the District Court of Louisiana held that: (1) the plaintiff failed to show that her reproductive disorder substantially limited the major life activity of working, and (2) reproduction was not a major life activity under the ADA.
From 1983 to 1992, Zatarain was a reporter and anchor woman at WDSU. In August 1990, she became head anchor and gave three nightly newscasts. In July 1992, Zatarain began fertility treatments in order to conceive a child. At that time, she worked approximately eight hours per day, usually arriving at 3:00 p.m. When she began taking hormone shots, she told WDSU she needed to get the shots between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m, so WDSU allowed her to report to work later than 3:00 p.m. in order to visit the doctor's office.
Zatarain's contract was due to expire in November 1992. In September, WDSU made her a one-year offer which she rejected because she wanted more money and a multi-year guarantee. In October, WDSU offered her a two-year deal with a higher salary. The parties disagree whether she accepted this offer. In November, Zatarain told WDSU her doctor recommended a reduced work schedule during the fertility treatments. WDSU did not agree to the changes and the contract was not renewed. Zatarain sued WDSU alleging violations of the ADA.
The district court stated that "[i]n order for Zatarain to state a claim under the ADA, she must have a disability, which is defined as a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities." The court noted that under the ADA regulations, an impairment is a "physiological disorder . . . affecting one or more of the following body systems: neurological, musculoskeletal, special sense organs, respiratory, cardiovascular, [and] reproductive . . . ." WDSU's contended Zatarain's condition was not physiological, but induced by job stress or age. The court noted that Zatarain's doctors could not conclude that her condition was solely the result of age or stress. Thus, the court found that Zatarain had an impairment.
The district court addressed "major life activities," which under the ADA regulations include: working, caring for oneself, performing manual tasks, walking, seeing, hearing, speaking, breathing, and learning. Zatarain cited Pacourek v. Inland Steel Co., 858 F. Supp. 1393 (N.D. Ill. 1994) which held that reproduction was a major life activity. However, the court found that reproduction occurred too infrequently to fit within the activities listed in the ADA regulations.
The district court found that working was the only major life activity affected by Zatarain's impairment. The regulations for "working" provide that "substantially limits means 'significantly restricted in the ability to perform either a class of jobs or a broad range of jobs in various classes. The inability to perform a single particular job does not constitute a substantial limitation in the major life activity of working.'" The court found no evidence that Zatarain's impairment significantly restricted her ability to perform a class of jobs or a broad range of jobs in various classes. Rather, the court found that Zatarain remained capable of performing a job as a news anchor, but that her condition prevented her from holding the particular position of prime-time news anchor. Thus, the court granted WDSU partial summary judgment.
Zatarain v. WDSU-Television, Inc., 881 F. Supp. 240 (E.D. La. 1995), aff'd 79 F.3d 1143 (5th Cir. 1996).