Andrea Tumbleson v. Lakota Local School Dist. Bd. of Educ., Case No. 25-3548 (6th Cir. 2026).
On May 13, 2026, the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that an Ohio school district did not violate the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) or the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) by requiring a teacher to use unpaid leave to attend a training course with her guide dog.
Tumbleson, an art teacher, had been diagnosed with a rare disease that caused gradual vision and hearing loss. Tumbleson applied for a guide dog in 2022. She was required to attend a five-day orientation and mobility training program, which required her to miss five days of school. The district approved her use of sick leave for this initial training session, as the human-resources director explained that employees were typically only required to complete FMLA paperwork for “extended absences” of ten or more days.
Tumbleson was eventually matched with a guide dog but was required to attend a three-week training course in May 2023, which meant she missed the end of the school year. Tumbleson requested the use of thirteen paid sick days to attend the training course. The request was granted in part by the district. Tumbleson was permitted to attend the training course using a mix of personal days and unpaid leave as an accommodation under the ADA. FMLA leave may be used only in limited circumstances, and district policy stated that sick leave could be used for “personal illness, injury or exposure to contagious disease.” The District did not believe that the training fit within either category even after Tumbleson received a letter from her doctor arguing the training was for “medical reasons” because the guide dog was part of her “treatment plan.”
The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the district on both the ADA and FMLA claims, upholding a lower court ruling that granted summary judgment to the district. The Court held that Tumbleson’s discrimination case failed because she did not demonstrate that the district treated “similarly situated” employees more favorably in their requests for paid leave. Tumbleson relied on the fact that the district “routinely” granted sick leave without going through the formalities and pointed to the fact that she previously had been granted sick leave for the earlier 5-day training. However, the Court argued Tumbleson’s own experience demonstrated that the district’s leave policy was neutrally applied. She benefited from the rule when she was permitted to take sick leave for her earlier, shorter training, and it was only when she requested an extended absence that the human resource department reviewed whether the training qualified.
The Court also argued that the use of unpaid leave was a reasonable accommodation under the ADA. Employers “need not provide” the specific accommodation that an employee wants. Rather, the employer has “discretion” to choose among alternative accommodations so long as they will permit the employee to perform the job. Because the unpaid leave allowed Tumbleson to obtain her guide dog, the Court concluded that the district met its obligation to provide a reasonable accommodation and the district had the “ultimate discretion” to choose a less expensive option, even if paid leave would have caused less hardship for Tumbleson.
Finally, the Court determined that Tumbleson also was not entitled to paid leave under the FMLA. To obtain paid leave, Tumbleson needed to show that the district “normally provided” paid leave for those in her situation. Citing 29 U.S.C. 2612(c) and 29 U.S.C. 2612(d)(2)(B). Here, the district testified that Tumbleson’s request did not fall within the definition of sick leave under Ohio law, the district’s collective bargaining agreement, or the school board’s sick leave policy and Tumbleson’s attorney failed to sufficiently challenge the district’s position.
What does this mean for your district? While districts must ensure that they are not discriminating against an employee on the basis of their disability, the ADA requires reasonable accommodation and nothing more. So long as the district’s policy is being consistently applied for all employees, unpaid leave is generally considered a reasonable accommodation and districts have discretion to choose the less expensive option even if it conflicts with the individual’s financial or other preferences.