A police officer began making complaints to his superiors about a fellow officer whom he believed was not spending sufficient time performing the community service work to which both officers had been assigned. At a meeting with the police chief and the officer’s supervisors, the officer became angry, demanded to see his union representative, stormed out, and later used an expletive in addressing one of his supervisors. The officer reported being “consumed” with anger and fear. A few months after the aborted meeting, the officer got in an argument with another officer during which he was visibly upset and swearing, he reported nearly losing control during a traffic stop, he was the object of a domestic violence call from his estranged wife (no charges were filed), and he made statements to officers like “It doesn’t matter how this ends.” He was ordered to undergo a Fitness for Duty Exam (FFDE). The examining doctor diagnosed a mood disorder and concluded that he was unfit for police duty due to a permanent disability. In conjunction with a subsequent pre-termination hearing, the officer obtained a second medical opinion which concurred in the view that he was currently unfit for duty, but which held out the hope that he could still be returned to duty after treatment. Although he appeared to be making progress, he was terminated after he refused to follow through with a second FFDE.  

1. What was the legal issue in this case? What did the court decide?

2. On what basis does the court decide that the fitness for duty exams were allowed under the ADA?

3. The case focuses on the medical exams, but what about the termination? Is there any argument to be made that his termination violates the ADA?

4. How much does this decision rest on the particular context of police work? What if the facts were similar but the employee was a waiter at a restaurant? A stock clerk at a warehouse?