Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Simpson v. Brennan

United States District Court, E.D. Wisconsin

January 16, 2020

HENRIETTA E. ARNOLD SIMPSON, Plaintiff,
v.
MEGAN BRENNAN, Postmaster General, Defendant.

          DECISION AND ORDER

          WILLIAM E. DUFFIN U.S. Magistrate Judge.

         1. Introduction

         Plaintiff Henrietta Arnold Simpson worked for the United States Postal Service (USPS). She filed this pro se complaint against her employer through Postmaster General Megan Brennan. (ECF No. 1.) She asserts a disability discrimination claim, presumably under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 701 et seq., see Sansone v. Donahoe, 98 F.Supp.3d 946, 952 (N.D. Ill. 2015), and a Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) claim. (ECF No. 1.)

         The defendant filed a motion to dismiss the disability discrimination claim for failure to state a claim, but acknowledges that the motion should be construed as a motion for summary judgment “[b]ecause that portion of the … motion presents matters outside the pleadings.…” (ECF No. 8 at 1.) The defendant has also filed a motion to dismiss the FMLA claim for failure to state a claim or, in the alternative, for a more definite statement. (Id.)

         2. Facts

         The defendant submitted proposed findings of fact in support of its motion to dismiss the disability discrimination claim. (ECF No. 9.) In the process, the defendant complied with Civ. L. R. 56(a)(1)(A) and 56(a)(1)(B). (ECF No. 7.) Simpson's response (ECF No. 11) to the defendant's motion did not include a response to the defendant's proposed findings of fact (ECF No. 9). Accordingly, the court deems the defendant's proposed findings of fact admitted by Simpson. See Civ. L. R. 56(b)(4) (“The Court will deem uncontroverted statements of material fact admitted solely for the purpose of deciding summary judgment.”). And, for purposes of the motion to dismiss the FMLA claim, the court accepts as true the allegations contained in the complaint. Gruber v. Creditors' Prot. Serv. Inc., 742 F.3d 271, 274 (7th Cir. 2014) (citing Zemeckis v. Global Credit & Collection Corp., 679 F.3d 632, 634 (7th Cir. 2012)).

         2.1. Robbery

         On December 21, 2017, [1] Simpson was working at the customer service window at the post office when she was robbed at gunpoint. (ECF No. 1 at 2.) She was subsequently diagnosed with “Acute Stress Disorder.” (ECF No. 9, ¶ 2.) She saw a psychiatrist and was given medical restrictions, including not working at the counter alone. (ECF No. 1-1 at 11.)

         2.2. Case Number 4J-530-0113-18

         On July 12, 2018, Simpson completed an “Information for Pre-Complaint Counseling” form. (ECF No. 9, ¶ 1.) On this form Simpson alleged that USPS discriminated against her on several occasions on the basis of her disability. (Id.) Simpson alleged that USPS did not follow her medical restriction of not working at the customer service window alone and never installed bulletproof glass at the window. (Id., ¶ 3.) She also alleged that, because of her medical restriction, she was harassed and humiliated at work. (Id., ¶ 4.) Her complaint was assigned No. 4J-530-0113-18. (Id., ¶ 1.)

         In an effort to resolve this dispute, on September 21, 2018, Simpson, her representative, and USPS entered into a mediation agreement. (ECF No. 9, ¶ 6). “The mediation agreement stated the parties understood that settlement during the mediation was entirely voluntary and that they would not be bound by mediation unless there was a written settlement agreement.” (Id., ¶ 7.)

         The parties did enter into a written settlement agreement and addendum on that same day. (ECF No. 9, ¶ 8.) The settlement agreement stated that it “constitute[d] a full and final settlement of all issues arising out of the subject matter of the following EEO complaint number(s) and by signing this agreement the counselee withdraws any pending EEO complaints and appeals relative to the subject matter of these complaints.” (Id., ¶ 10 (quoting id. at 19, 24).) Furthermore, the settlement agreement stated that it was final and binding. (Id., ¶ 9.) The terms of the agreement were included in an addendum, which was part of the agreement. (Id.) The addendum noted that it was for No. 4J-530-0113-18 (id., ¶ 11) and stated in relevant part:

In exchange for the consideration and mutual promises set forth below, The United States Postal Service (“USPS” or the “Agency”) and the Counselee Henrietta Arnold-Simpson (“Counselee”), jointly referred to as “the Parties, ” do hereby enter into this Settlement Agreement (“the Agreement”). By doing so, it is the intent of the Parties to resolve, completely and finally, any existing and potential claims by Counselee arising out of the Counselee's employment with the Agency prior to the date of this Agreement.
1. Management agrees to issue a lump sum payment in the amount of Five Hundred Dollars and No. Cents ($500.00) ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.