Blair v. County of El Dorado CA3

Filed 8/30/23 Blair v. County of El Dorado CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (El Dorado) ----

ADENA BLAIR,

Plaintiff and Appellant, C095031

v. (Super. Ct. No. PC20180575)

COUNTY OF EL DORADO,

Defendant and Respondent.

The County of El Dorado (County) provided a leave of absence to Adena Blair, then a public health nurse with the County, following Blair’s kidney-donation surgery. According to Blair, the County denied her request to work from home as a reasonable accommodation, whereas Blair’s supervisor said she did not receive any such request to work from home. Blair sued the County for failure to accommodate and failure to engage in the interactive process. The trial court granted the County’s motion for summary judgment. Blair now contends the trial court applied the wrong standard in addressing her claims under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) (Gov. Code,

1

§ 12900 et seq.), arguing that whether a particular accommodation was available and reasonable was a triable issue of material fact. Because summary judgment was supported by undisputed material facts, we will affirm the judgment. BACKGROUND Blair began working as a public health nurse for the County in January 2017.1 Her job involved field visits during which she would carry a 15 to 30 pound bag. After an injury to her ribs and a medical restriction on lifting, Blair asked the County in early 2017 for a reasonable accommodation. The County agreed that Blair would not need to conduct field visits for 20 days. Blair subsequently obtained a medical release removing the lifting restriction. Later that same year, Blair informed her supervisor Amber Burget that she might become an organ donor. Burget told Blair to let Sharon Keoppel know when she required a leave of absence. On October 2, Blair sent an e-mail to Keoppel informing her that Blair might donate a kidney. Keoppel forwarded the information from Blair to Risk Management Analyst Gina Coppa-McBain. Coppa-McBain understood that Blair believed she was entitled to paid leave. On November 6, Blair notified Burget that she would require six weeks of recovery after surgery. Coppa-McBain learned that the law requiring paid leave for organ donation did not apply to the County; she informed Blair of that and asked for a completed leave application. It was determined that Blair did not qualify for leave under the Family Medical Leave Act or the California Family Rights Act.