A frequent question in disability cases concerns how long can an employer take when considering a request for accommodation. Some requests are so urgent that any delay will cause irreparable injury. In Strife v. Aldine Independent School District, No. 24-20269 (5th Cir. May 16, 2025), we get some answers. In Strife, a teacher, Alisha Strife, was a combat veteran of the Iraq war. She had been diagnosed with PTSD. She asked to bring a service animal to work with her. She provided two notes from two different VA doctors. But, Aldine ISD objected to the first letter, because the doctor was a Pharmacist, who practiced psychiatry with a VA protocol to treat veterans. Ms. Strife then provided the second letter from another VA psychiatrist.
Delay
Then Aldine ISD asked the doctor to complete a lengthy questionnaire in August. Then the employer asked Strife to sit for a medical exam. At that point, Ms. Strife rightfully felt the district was dragging out the process. In November, the entity that certified the service animal notified Aldine that its actions amounted to discrimination. A week later, the district asked Ms. Strife if she was refusing to continue with the interactive process. A couple days later, Strife’s attorney wrote a letter to the school district explaining the law of accommodations. Aldine’s lawyer then responded that the district had a right to consider other accommodations in addition to a service animal.
(Of course, that is a strange response. It is hard to imagine an accommodation that would meet the patient’s needs for 24/7 support that do not include a service animal).
Strife’s lawyer then replied asking what other “additional” accommodations Aldine was considering. Aldine then responded that the two letters from the doctors were not reliable, because they lacked letterhead and had conflicting doctor titles. (At this point, it had to occur to Strife’s lawyer that Aldine was deliberately stringing her along).
Two More Letters
In December, 2023, Aldine scheduled Ms. Strife for a medical exam. The following January, Strife’s lawyer provided two more letters from doctors indicating that Strife needed the use of a service animal at work. Ms. Strife also filed a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. That same month. Aldine ISD rejected the two new letters, because they did not discuss other possible accommodations.
Dismissal
Eventually, Ms. Strife filed suit. The district court granted Aldine’s motion to dismiss regarding Strife’s failure to accommodate allegation. On appeal, however, the Fifth Circuit disagreed. The court fist noted that the issue of delay had not yet been addressed in the Fifth Circuit – except in non-binding dicta.
The Fifth Circuit noted that Aldine eventually granted Ms. Strife’s request for a service animal – after six months. The court noted that delay was not just potentially harmful to the employee. It also suggested a lack of good faith on the part of the employer in evaluating her request. The employee argued that she provided sufficient information such that school district should have been aware of her impairment. The Court agreed. When considering a motion to dismiss, a court should draw all inferences in favor of the non-movant. Ms. Strife met her burden to show adequate evidence such that the employer should have acknowledged her disability much sooner than it did.
Indeed, noted the court, the district did not grant her request for accommodation until after the employee filed suit. Aldine defended itself saying the delay caused no harm to Ms. Strife. But, the Fifth Circuit rejected that argument. It noted that the ADA does not require actual harm when denying or delaying a request for accommodation. The only question is whether Aldine “failed to make reasonable accommodations” after being informed of Strife’s limitations. The Court then reversed the lower court’s dismissal. See the Fifth Circuit opinion here.