Berg v. Fairfax Cnty Public ( 1997 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
KATHERINE A. BERG,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v. No. 96-2309
FAIRFAX COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria.
Robert E. Payne, District Judge.
(CA-96-886-A)
Submitted: December 10, 1996
Decided: January 2, 1997
Before ERVIN and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER,
Senior Circuit Judge.
_________________________________________________________________
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
_________________________________________________________________
COUNSEL
Katherine A. Berg, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas John Cawley, John
Francis Cafferky, HUNTON & WILLIAMS, McLean, Virginia, for
Appellee.
_________________________________________________________________
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
Local Rule 36(c).
OPINION
PER CURIAM:
Katherine Berg appeals from the district court's order granting
Defendant's motion for summary judgment and dismissing her com-
plaint filed pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA),
42 U.S.C. §§ 12101-12213 (1994). We have reviewed the record and
the district court's order and find no reversible error. Berg's prior
sworn testimony before the Workers' Compensation Commission and
her submission of notes and certifications from her treating physicians
conclusively established that she could not perform the essential func-
tions of her position, thus rendering her "unqualified" for the position
under the ADA. 42 U.S.C. § 12111(8) (1994); Southeastern Commu-
nity College v. Davis, 442 U.S. 397, 406 (1979); Myers v. Hose, 50
F.3d 278, 281-82 (4th Cir. 1995); Tyndall v. National Educ. Ctrs., 31
F.3d 209, 212-13 (4th Cir. 1994); August v. Offices Unlimited, Inc.,
981 F.2d 576, 581-83 (1st Cir. 1992). We further find that the district
court correctly found that the accommodations requested by Berg
were unreasonable.* See Myers, 50 F.3d at 284; Milton v. Scrivner,
Inc., 53 F.3d 1118, 1124-25 (10th Cir. 1995); Gilbert v. Frank, 949
F.2d 637, 644 (2d Cir. 1991). Accordingly, we affirm the order of the
district court. Berg v. Fairfax County Pub. Schs., No. CA-96-886-A
(E.D. Va. Aug. 21, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materi-
als before the court and argument would not aid the decisional pro-
cess.
AFFIRMED
_________________________________________________________________
*Berg requested that she either be reassigned to another position, or
that others perform the tasks she could not.
2