Keith v. County of Oakland

Nicholas Keith (plaintiff), a deaf person certified as a lifeguard, applied to be a lifeguard at Oakland County’s (Oakland) (defendant) wave pool. Recreation specialist Katherine Stavale offered Keith a part-time lifeguarding position, conditioned upon passing a standard preemployment physical. During Keith’s physical, Dr. Paul Work summarily determined that Keith could not be a lifeguard because Keith was deaf. Stavale then placed Keith’s employment on hold and contacted Wayne Crokus, a consultant specializing in aquatic safety and risk management. Stavale provided Crokus with a six-page outline of accommodations that she believed could successfully integrate Keith into the wave pool’s lifeguard team. For example, Keith would carry laminated note cards to help Keith communicate with guests, and Oakland would modify its emergency-action plan so that lifeguards would initiate the protocol by using a uniform hand signal. Crokus opined that Keith could not safely serve as a lifeguard without 100 percent certainty that the accommodations would always be effective. Ultimately, Stavale and her supervisors decided to revoke Keith’s employment offer. Keith sued Oakland in federal district court, arguing that Oakland had violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Keith presented evidence that Keith could comply with Oakland’s communication requirements through reasonable accommodation. Keith also presented expert witnesses who explained that the ability to detect distressed swimmers was an almost entirely visual skill and that a full-time American Sign Language interpreter was unnecessary for Keith to perform essential lifeguarding functions. One expert, Anita Marchitelli, had certified more than 1,000 deaf lifeguards. According to Marchitelli, there were no reported incidents of drowning or near-drowning involving deaf lifeguards, and Leroy Colombo, a deaf man, held the world record for the most lives saved in a lifeguarding career (over 900 lives). The district court granted Oakland’s summary-judgment motion, reasoning that Oakland had ultimately made an individualized inquiry regarding Keith’s abilities after Work’s initial failure to make an individualized inquiry and that Keith had failed to show that he could perform a lifeguard’s essential communication functions. Keith appealed.