This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: ed.
Furthermore, we do not believe Prevo's actions rise to the level of "adverse employment
decisions based on stereotypes and generalizations." Id. Prevo's made a concerted effort
to continue employing Sharp and at the same wage and time scale. When Sharp disclosed
his alleged HIV condition, he was moved to a position located only a few feet away from
his previous one. He continued to receive the same pay and benefits. When Prevo's
placed Sharp on leave, it was paid leave, a benefit to which, as a part time employee,
Sharp was not entitled; nor was Sharp entitled to [**27] the benefits Prevo's
continued to provide. Finally, after nearly a year of paid leave and after repeated
promises by Sharp to provide medical information from his personal doctor, Sharp
skipped the medical examination Prevo's had scheduled and for which it offered to pay.
Yet, Prevo's extended Sharp another job offer as a data analyst. None of Prevo's actions
rises to the level of discrimination guarded against by the statute.
Another portion of Prevo's argument is that Sharp represents a direct threat to the health
and safety of others in the workplace and there can be no reasonable accommodation for
him, thereby justifying his dismissal. Because we do not have in the record whether
Sharp is indeed, HIV positive, we will not address this part of Prevo's argument.
However, we do not need to reach that issue in order to reverse the summary judgment
order imposed by the district court.
V. Punitive Damages
Because we have found that Prevo's did not discriminate against Sharp in violation of the
ADA, we do not reach the merits of the punitive damage claim. However, we briefly
outline our finding of insufficient evidence to justify such an award. 222 At no time during the course [**28] of this case did Prevo's actions rise to the level of
intentional or careless conduct. When Sharp informed Prevo's of his condition, Prevo's
continued to employ Sharp, placing him in a similar position and with the same pay and
benefits. Prevo's did not act out of malice but act...
View Full Document
- Spring '08