Cook V. Rhode Island

Cook v. State of Rhode Island, et al. 10 F.3d 17 (1993)

• Facts: Appellee Cook was denied employment by appellant Department of Mental Health, Retardation and Hospitals (MHRH). Appellee claims that the decision not to hire her was discriminatory against her disability of being in the state of morbid obesity, alleging the violation of § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

A nurse employed by MHRH concluded, following a routine pre-hire physical, that appellee’s state of morbid obesity does not limit her ability to fulfill the duties required for the position that appellee is applying to be employed. Appellant argues appellee’s disability compromises her ability to effectively perform in emergency evacuations and puts her health at greater risk, thus causing absenteeism and the potential of workers’ compensation claims.

• Issue: Is appellant in this case accountable for the alleged violation of § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 in the manner set forth above under the first and third methods of “perceived disability” within the purview of 45 C.F.R. § 84.3 (j)(2)(iv)?

• Reasoning: Appellee had to show: (1) while she had a physical or mental impairment, it did not substantially limit her ability to perform major life activities or (2) she did not suffer at all from a statutorily prescribed physical or mental impairment as well as prove that MHRH treated her impairment (whether actual of perceived) as substantially limiting one or more of her major life activities. Although the court did not openly recognize appellee as having the former, with no objection, the court proceeded with the latter charge.

Appellant asserts two defenses: (1) mutability claiming that morbid obesity is a mutable condition that (a) is not the sort of impairment in the lee of § 504 and (b) one who suffers is not handicapped, therefore not protected by definition of federal law. Also, (2) voluntariness, appellant asserts that morbid obesity is caused by voluntary conduct, thus