James F. Trambly v. Board of Regents of the University of Nebraska

Lincoln, Nebraska employment law lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued on a civil rights job discrimination theory.



Trambly was hired by the University of Nebraska-Kearney in November 2013 to work as a help desk associate in the Information Technology department.Trambly's duties included responding to requests for assistance, supporting assigned academic departments, and managing student workers. University policy forbade Trambly to misuse the university's computer and network systems. Trambly's job performance began to decline around July 2017 after he was promoted to the position of workstation support specialist. After outstanding annual performance evaluations through 2017, Trambly received a egative evaluation for the period between April 2017 and March 2018. Trambly's supervisor noted that he had problems with communication, including interjecting himself into colleagues' work, becoming visibly overwhelmed and frustrated, interrupting clients, and spending excessive time on service calls. Trambly said that he agreed with "most” of his supervisors comments. Trambly's job performance continued to worsen through the remainder of 2018.



In November 2018, Trambly accused a co-worker of interfering with his e-mail account, and the university launched an investigation. On January 30, 2019, Trambly decided to take matters into his own hands: without authorization, he pulled a hard drive from a university computer to gather what he thought was evidence relevant to the investigation. Trambly's unauthorized removal of computer equipment violated the university's policy on electronic information systems. The university terminated Trambly's at-will employment on February 8, 2019.



In July 2020, Trambly brought this action in state court, and the Board removed the case to federal court. Trambly's complaint alleged disability discrimination in the form of a hostile work environment, disparate treatment, and failure to accommodate under the Rehabilitation Act and the Nebraska Fair Employment Practices Act (NFEPA). See 29 U.S.C. § 701 et seq.; Neb. Rev. Stat. § 48-1101, et seq. Trambly also alleged retaliation for requesting accommodations in violation of the Rehabilitation Act, NFEPA, and Title V of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). See 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. The district court denied as futile Trambly's motion to amend his complaint to allege a violation of Title II of the ADA because the court concluded that a claim of employment-based discrimination could arise only

under Title I.



In his complaint, as relevant here, Trambly alleged that he made the university aware of a documented "mental mpairment,” later identified as attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD); that he repeatedly was denied accommodations during his employment; that he was disciplined in retaliation for requesting accommodations; that his supervisor, Heidi Haussermann, threatened in 2016 that she would fire Trambly "if he continued to bring up his disabilities”; and

that he was terminated in February 2019 "in retaliation for requesting accommodations.

Motion for summary judgment granted.



Affirmed