Listed in Chambers USA, Labor & Employment, 2020-2022 Listed in The Best Lawyers in America®, Litigation – Labor and Employment, 2021-2022 Won summary judgment in ADA and wrongful termination case against a city involving the plaintiff’s CBD usage and a failed drug test for marijuana. The plaintiff, a city employee, claimed that her usage of legal CBD had a permitted amount of THC that caused her to fail a drug test. Our client argued that regardless of whether the plaintiff only used legal CBD products or illegal marijuana, the result of the drug test as verified by the medical review officer was positive for marijuana as the test could not tell the difference between THC consumed via legal CBD usage and THC consumed via illegal marijuana. Our client argued that it was entitled to rely on the result of the verified drug test and that there was no evidence the city was aware of the plaintiff’s alleged disability. The federal court agreed with our client’s arguments and granted the motion for summary judgment in full, dismissing the plaintiff’s lawsuit in its entirety (2020 WL 5424104 (M.D. Tenn. Sept. 10, 2020)). Won summary judgment in an ADA and workers’ comp retaliation case filed against automotive personnel supplier. Federal court granted our client’s motion for summary judgment, adopting our client’s arguments that the Defendant did not fail to accommodate the plaintiff and did not retaliate against him for requesting workers’ comp benefits (2019 WL 3288462, M.D. Tenn. July 22, 2019; 2019 WL 3294805, M.D. Tenn., May 31, 2019). Won summary judgment in ADA and Title VII case. Federal court granted our client’s motion for summary judgment in case brought against public employer (2019 WL 109370, M.D. Tenn., Jan. 3, 2019). Won summary judgment in ADA and FMLA case. Federal court granted our client’s motion for summary judgment in case against personnel supplier in automotive industry. In granting our client’s motion for summary judgment, the court held that client was entitled to rely on an FMLA certification showing the plaintiff was not legally entitled to leave, that plaintiff did not make a request for a reasonable accommodation as a matter of law, and that the plaintiff could not show that our client’s legitimate, non-discriminatory and non-retaliatory reason for terminating him was pre-textual (2018 WL 4494839, M.D. Tenn., Sept. 19, 2018). Successfully defended major Southeastern convenience store chain in 2017 against claims that store’s parking lot and restrooms were not compliant with Title III of the ADA. Represented client and worked with ADA compliance expert in addressing the store’s ADA compliance issues to prevent subsequent litigation and negotiated successful settlement with plaintiff to resolve dispute. Won summary judgment for hospital in ADA case involving drug testing and allegations of disability discrimination. The plaintiff claimed that she had a “false positive” drug test and her resulting termination was in violation of the ADA. The court granted client’s motion for summary judgment as the plaintiff had no evidence that our client had any knowledge of her disability, and even if plaintiff’s drug testing results were incorrect, client was entitled to rely on the results of a drug test a medical review officer certified as correct (219 F. Supp. 3d 738, W.D. Tenn., 2016). Won summary judgment in ADA and FMLA case against credit union client. In September 2016, the court granted client’s motion for summary judgment in an ADA and FMLA case and denied the plaintiff’s motion to set aside the judgment (U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Case No. 3:15-cv-805, Sept. 28, 2016). Won dismissal of ADA claims based on statute of limitations and failure to state claim grounds. The U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee dismissed all of plaintiff’s employee’s claims in disability discrimination case based on motion to dismiss on statute of limitations and failure to state a claim grounds (2012 WL 6021435, M.D. Tenn., Dec. 4, 2012). Assisted in obtaining summary judgment for employer in ADA discrimination and retaliation case on the basis that each time the employee complained it attempted to accommodate her condition and that it did not know of the EEOC charge at the time of discharge (2012 WL 4484939, M.D. Tenn., Sept. 27, 2012).