UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
For the Fifth Circuit
No. 98-20617
Summary Calendar
OLHA MORGAN, also known as Olga Morgan,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
VERSUS
CMS/DATA CORPORATION,
Defendant-Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
For the Southern District of Texas
(H-97-CV-942)
December 17, 1998
Before EMILIO GARZA, DeMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
CMS/Data Corporation (CMS) is in the business of
manufacturing, selling and installing billing software for law
firms across the country. Olga Morgan (Morgan) was hired by CMS in
November 1990 as a project manager. The main function of a CMS
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this
opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under
the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
project manager is to oversee the implementation of and conversion
to CMS’ billing software. Because CMS offers its products across
the country and because onsight installation is required, a project
manager position with CMS entails substantial travel. Morgan knew
this when she was hired. She also knew when she was hired that CMS
considered its project manager’s position to be an administrative
position which is exempt from the overtime requirements of the
FSLA.
Beginning in 1995 and continuing into 1996, several of CMS’
clients complained to CMS about Morgan’s performance, stating that
Morgan claimed to be overworked and "burned out." On September 16,
1996, CMS notified Morgan in writing about the client complaints
and her declining performance. Feeling that her job was in
jeopardy, Morgan retained counsel. Her counsel informed CMS in a
letter dated September 30, 1996, that Morgan was under a
physician’s care for depression and requested that Morgan’s
depression be accommodated by allowing her a week off, by
curtailing her workload to no more than 8 hours per day, by
minimizing out-of-town travel, by assignment to her of accounts
located within her home area, and by immediate cessation of
harassment and other unnecessary external stress related to the
performance of her job duties. On October 3, 1996, before CMS
responded to the September 30 letter from Morgan’s lawyer, Morgan
filed an EEOC complaint alleging disability discrimination in
violation of the ADA.
2
After a prolific exchange of correspondence between Morgan’s
counsel and either CMS or CMS’ counsel and repeated written
requests on the part of CMS for more medical information regarding
Morgan’s condition, four job options were offered to Morgan. She
did not find any of the four acceptable and shortly thereafter
filed this suit. In this suit, Morgan seeks compensation for the
overtime work she performed while she was an employee of CMS,
redress for what she characterizes as CMS’ refusal reasonably to
accommodate her disability, and damages for what she claims is her
constructive discharge, intentional infliction of emotional
distress, breach of contract and fraud. The parties filed cross-
motions for summary judgment. The district court denied Morgan’s
motions for summary judgment and granted the motion for summary
judgment by CMS. Morgan timely appeals.
We have carefully reviewed the briefs, the record excerpts,
the reply brief, and relevant portions of the record itself. For
the reasons stated by the district court in its comprehensive
memorandum and order filed under date of June 4, 1998, we affirm
the final judgment entered in this matter on June 4, 1998, which
granted CMS’ motion for summary judgment and dismissed plaintiff’s
causes of action on the merits.
AFFIRMED.
3