How Employees Can Prove Disability Discrimination And FMLA Retaliation
When an employer gets sued for employment discrimination, wrongful termination, or retaliation, they all seem to know the same song: “performance.” They play it loudly. They play it repeatedly. The employee was late. The employee missed deadlines. The employee made mistakes. Then come the metrics, write-ups, corrective actions, and performance reviews. The employer points to the paper and expects everyone to accept the accusations as fact because a manager typed them into a document. But writing something down does not make it true. And writing it down after an employee develops a medical condition, takes Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) leave, or requests a disability accommodation can raise an entirely different question: Why did the employer suddenly start keeping score now? Performance problems may be legitimate. They may also be exaggerated, stripped of context, selectively documented, or used to hide discrimination and retaliation. The paper trail does not end the inquiry. Sometimes it starts it.
Jennifer Ramsey’s story shows why. Ramsey began working for San Jacinto College District in 2005. She was promoted four times and received positive performance reviews for years. Starting in 2018, however, Ramsey suffered from a “severe medical condition” affecting her “vision, hearing, balance, and other cognitive functions.” She eventually took FMLA leave for surgery from November 2020 through January 4, 2021. Eleven days after returning to work, Ramsey received her first written complaint about her work.
That was only the beginning. Ramsey later took another period of FMLA leave, received approval for intermittent FMLA leave, and sought disability accommodation for migraines and hearing problems. Meanwhile, the performance documentation accumulated. Her employer cited tardiness, missed deadlines, errors, communication problems, and allegedly unprofessional conduct. On December 1, 2021, Ramsey’s supervisor recommended termination. Two days later, she was fired.
Ramsey sued. The district court granted summary judgment to the employer. But the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit saw factual disputes that a judge could not simply resolve in the employer’s favor. In Ramsey v. San Jacinto College District, No. 25-20195, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 23946 (5th Cir. Aug. 5, 2026), the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed summary judgment on Ramsey’s ADA disability discrimination, ADA retaliation, and FMLA retaliation claims. It affirmed summary judgment against Ramsey only on her FMLA interference claim.
The employer had paperwork. Ramsey had evidence that called the story told by that paperwork into question. At summary judgment, credibility disputes are not for the judge to settle. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that courts may not “evaluate the credibility of the witnesses, weigh the evidence, or resolve factual disputes.” The question is whether a reasonable jury could find for the employee.
That distinction gave Ramsey another day in court.
Legal Takeaways
- Disability discrimination: An employer can offer poor performance as a legitimate reason for termination, but an employee can survive summary judgment by producing evidence that creates a genuine factual dispute over whether that explanation was the real reason for the wrongful termination. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that “[a]n explanation is false or unworthy of credence if it is not the real reason for the adverse employment action.”
- ADA and FMLA retaliation: Timing can help establish retaliation, but timing becomes substantially stronger when paired with evidence challenging the employer’s credibility. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the “combination of suspicious timing with other significant evidence of pretext[] can be sufficient to survive summary judgment.”
Can I Prove Disability Discrimination If My Employer Says I Was Fired For Poor Performance?
Yes. An employee can prove disability discrimination even when the employer has documented performance problems. The employer gets to offer poor performance as its legitimate reason for the termination. But it does not get to declare its own paperwork true. The employee can survive summary judgment by producing evidence from which a reasonable jury could find that the stated reason was pretext – not the real reason for the wrongful termination.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that an employee challenging the employer’s reason must rebut each discrete reason offered for the termination. But at summary judgment, the employee does not have to prove pretext conclusively. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held: “the question is not whether the plaintiff proves pretext, but rather whether the plaintiff raises a genuine issue of fact regarding pretext.” Ramsey, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 23946, at *12.
San Jacinto College District had ammunition. It pointed to repeated tardiness, missed deadlines, errors, and multiple corrective notices. Ramsey even acknowledged some non-medical reasons for being late, including traffic, forgetting something at home, a tire leak, and, memorably, cleaning “rodent carnage” at her house. The dissent thought that record made the answer obvious: poor performance caused the firing.
The majority did not erase those facts. It found evidence that could make a jury question the employer’s narrative. Ramsey had worked there since 2005, received four promotions, and had years of positive performance reviews. Her first written complaint about her work came eleven days after she returned from FMLA leave in January 2021. Even after a June corrective action, her July performance review rated her “valuable.”
Then there was what the paperwork left out. The Final Corrective Action Notice criticized Ramsey for elevated tones and quoted her asking why nobody “accommodates me.” Ramsey claimed she had told her supervisor that her hearing problems caused her raised voice. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals found that omitting that disability-related context could permit a reasonable factfinder to doubt whether the other reasons in the notice were real.
Paper does not turn an employer’s version of events into truth. Credibility still belongs to the jury.
Practical Tip: If your employer suddenly starts documenting “poor performance” after learning about your medical condition, preserve the write-ups alongside earlier performance reviews, emails, awards, accommodation communications, and FMLA records. Contradictions between what the employer documented before and after learning about the medical issue can provide evidence that a claimed performance reason for termination is pretext rather than the real reason you were fired.
Best Disability Discrimination Lawyer Blogs on Point:
Can My Employer Retaliate Against Me For Requesting An Accommodation For A Medical Condition?
No. The ADA protects employees with qualifying disabilities from disability discrimination, and reasonable accommodations are part of that protection. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the ADA prohibits an employer from discriminating “against a qualified individual on the basis of disability.” An employee is qualified when the employee can perform the essential functions of the job despite the disability. Ramsey, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 23946, at *9-10.
A disability accommodation addresses a workplace barrier created by the employee’s medical condition so the employee can continue working. Ramsey’s requests illustrate the point. Her migraines created problems with fluorescent lighting, so she requested softer lighting. Her hearing problems led her to request a specialized headset. These were requests directed at particular medical limitations affecting her at work – not requests for an employer to excuse every future performance problem.
And the employee is legally protected for asking. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that “making a request for a reasonable accommodation under the ADA constitutes participat[ing] in an activity protected under the statute.” Ramsey, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 23946, at *21. An ADA retaliation claim requires the employee to initially show three things: protected activity, an adverse employment action, and a causal connection between them. Requesting the disability accommodation can satisfy the first element. Termination can satisfy the second. Very close timing can supply the initial causal connection.
Ramsey’s accommodation history was concrete. When she did not receive support for softer lighting, she bought lamps for her office herself. When she did not receive responses concerning a specialized headset, she bought that herself too. Later, when the headset caused pain, Ramsey spoke with supervisor Kam Marvel about obtaining another device. Marvel acknowledged her request by email on November 19, 2021, and copied an HR employee.
Twelve days later, Marvel recommended firing her.
That twelve-day gap mattered. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that it was “sufficiently close to establish the causal element for her prima facie case of retaliation.” Ramsey, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 23946, at *22. But timing alone could not establish pretext after San Jacinto College District offered legitimate performance reasons for the termination. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the “combination of suspicious timing with other significant evidence of pretext[] can be sufficient to survive summary judgment.” Id. at *22-23.
Ramsey had more than timing. Marvel’s Final Corrective Action Notice attributed to her the complaint, “Why do I have to accommodate everyone? Nobody accommodates me.” Yet Marvel later declared that he did not know whether Ramsey had requested accommodations from the College for a disability when he recommended termination. Other evidence reflected his knowledge of her brain injury, migraines, intermittent FMLA leave, hearing issues, and headset request.
That put credibility squarely in play. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a reasonable factfinder could find Marvel’s statement about his knowledge of Ramsey’s accommodation requests false and could conclude that his other statements about why she was fired were not the real reasons for the termination.
An employee should not have to choose between asking for a disability accommodation and keeping a target off their back.
Practical Tip: Make a disability accommodation request in writing and connect the requested change to the specific limitation caused by your medical condition. Preserve that request, the employer’s response, and later discipline because those records can establish who knew about the disability accommodation, when they knew it, and whether a later claim of ignorance or poor performance is credible.
Best Medical Accommodation At Work Attorney Blogs on Point:
Can My Employer Avoid Disability Discrimination Liability If The Final Decisionmaker Did Not Know About My Disability?
Not necessarily. An employer cannot always defeat a disability discrimination claim simply by arguing that the person who formally approved the termination did not know about the employee’s disability. Employment decisions are often built by more than one person. When a supervisor with discriminatory animus influences the decisionmaker and causes the adverse action, the employer may still face liability under what employment law calls the cat’s paw theory.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the theory applies when the employee shows “(1) that a co-worker exhibited discriminatory animus, and (2) that the same co-worker possessed leverage, or exerted influence, over the titular decisionmaker.” Ramsey, 2026 U.S. App. LEXIS 23946, at *19. The employee must also show that the biased person’s conduct was a proximate cause of the ultimate employment action.
San Jacinto College District had a seemingly clean defense. Chancellor Brenda Hellyer was the final decisionmaker. She testified that she did not know about Ramsey’s disability when she initially approved the termination. If knowledge stopped with the person whose name appeared at the end of the process, the employer’s argument would have considerable force.
But Ramsey’s termination did not begin with Hellyer. Marvel supervised Ramsey, documented her alleged performance deficiencies, authored the November 4 Final Corrective Action Notice, and recommended her termination on December 1. The next day, Vice Chancellor Teri Zamora forwarded that recommendation to Hellyer, who approved it.
Marvel’s knowledge was disputed. He declared that he did not know whether Ramsey had requested disability accommodations when he recommended termination. Yet his notes referred to her brain injury. The record contained communications involving her migraines, intermittent FMLA leave, hearing issues, and headset request. His Final Corrective Action Notice even attributed to Ramsey the complaint, “Why do I have to accommodate everyone? Nobody accommodates me.”
That credibility dispute belonged to a jury. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a reasonable factfinder could disbelieve Marvel’s claim that he lacked knowledge of Ramsey’s disability accommodation requests. And because Marvel recommended termination, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that a reasonable factfinder could conclude his recommendation caused Ramsey’s firing.
An employer cannot necessarily insulate a discriminatory termination by putting an uninformed decisionmaker at the end of the chain.
That principle changes what an employee and employment lawyer should investigate in a wrongful termination case. The relevant question is not merely, “Who signed off on my firing?” It is also: Who built the case for firing me? Who supplied the allegations? Who wrote the corrective actions? Who recommended termination? And what did those people know about the employee’s medical condition or disability accommodation?
Practical Tip: If you suspect disability discrimination, preserve communications with every supervisor involved in your discipline, not just the person who ultimately fired you. Identifying who created the write-ups, supplied information, recommended termination, and knew about your medical condition or disability accommodation can help an attorney determine whether a biased supervisor influenced the final decision and caused the wrongful termination.
Best Wrongful Termination Law Firm Blogs on Point:
What Should I Look For In An Employment Lawyer If I Was Wrongfully Fired Because Of A Medical Condition?
If you were wrongfully fired after requesting a disability accommodation, using FMLA leave, or dealing with a medical condition at work, you need an employment lawyer who knows how to attack the employer’s story, not merely repeat your side of it. The best employee-side attorney will want the performance reviews from before the dispute, the write-ups that came after, the accommodation requests, FMLA records, emails, texts, termination documents, and the names of everyone who helped make the decision. Why? Because disability discrimination and wrongful termination cases are often won by exposing contradictions: who knew what, when they knew it, what suddenly changed, and whether the employer’s carefully documented “performance” explanation survives comparison with the actual record.
Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm is one of the largest law firms in the United States dedicated to employee rights. That gives our attorneys the resources to investigate employment law claims while still treating the employee like a person whose career and livelihood matter. Our lawyers have substantial trial experience and a history of fighting employers in discrimination, retaliation, FMLA, disability accommodation, and wrongful termination cases. We offer a free initial consultation and a no-fee guarantee, so an employee can speak with an attorney about what happened without paying just to find out whether there may be a claim. If your employer suddenly discovered “performance problems” after learning about your medical condition, approving intermittent FMLA leave, or receiving a disability accommodation request, call Spitz and let an employment lawyer examine whether performance was really the reason you were fired.
FAQs About Disability Discrimination, FMLA, And Wrongful Termination
Yes. An employee may have a wrongful termination claim when a medical condition qualifies for legal protection and the employer fires the employee because of disability discrimination or protected activity. An employer may still discipline an employee for legitimate reasons, but labeling the reason “performance” does not automatically defeat a discrimination or retaliation claim.
Can Poor Performance Defeat A Disability Discrimination Claim?
Not automatically. An employer can identify poor performance as a legitimate reason for termination, but an employee may challenge that explanation as pretext. Evidence such as inconsistent performance reviews, contradictory explanations, omitted medical context, disputed facts, or credibility problems can support an argument that performance was not the real reason for the wrongful termination.
Can An Employer Retaliate Against An Employee For Requesting A Disability Accommodation?
No. Requesting a reasonable disability accommodation under the ADA is protected activity. An employee who suffers an adverse employment action after requesting a disability accommodation may have a retaliation claim when the evidence supports a causal connection and, after the employer offers a legitimate reason, supports a finding of pretext and the required retaliatory causation.
Can An Employer Retaliate Against An Employee For Using FMLA Leave?
No. An employer cannot lawfully retaliate against an employee for protected FMLA activity. If an employer claims the employee was fired for performance problems, evidence concerning timing, inconsistencies, credibility, and the employer’s knowledge of the FMLA activity may become relevant to whether the stated reason was pretext.
What Is Intermittent FMLA Leave For A Medical Condition?
Intermittent FMLA leave can involve approved FMLA leave for recurring medical needs rather than one continuous absence from work. The uploaded decision illustrates this with approved ongoing intermittent leave that was later revised to include migraine flareups and communications concerning physician appointments.
Does Close Timing Prove FMLA Retaliation Or Disability Discrimination?
Not by itself at the pretext stage. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that temporal proximity alone was insufficient there, but suspicious timing combined with other significant evidence of pretext can allow a claim to survive summary judgment.
Can An Employer Avoid Disability Discrimination Liability If The Final Decisionmaker Did Not Know About The Disability?
Not necessarily. Under the cat’s paw theory discussed by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, an employer may face liability when a person with discriminatory animus influences the ultimate decisionmaker and that person’s conduct proximately causes the adverse employment action.
Employment Lawyer Disclaimer
This employee rights, workplace discrimination, disability discrimination, disability accommodation, FMLA, intermittent leave, wrongful termination, and employment law blog provides general information only and should not be taken as legal advice. Every employee, employer, medical condition, discrimination claim, FMLA issue, and termination involves different facts and legal issues, and an employee who believes they were wrongfully fired or subjected to disability discrimination, retaliation, denial of a disability accommodation, interference involving intermittent FMLA leave, or other wrongful termination should consult with a qualified employment lawyer or attorney for advice about their specific situation. No lawyer or attorney can promise that any employment law claim will produce a particular result, and Spitz, The Employee’s Law Firm makes no promises or guarantees regarding the outcome of any discrimination, FMLA, disability accommodation, or wrongful termination matter. Reading this blog, contacting the firm, or receiving general information does not create an attorney-client relationship. This blog is a legal advertisement.