A federal court in Alabama has dismissed part of a Birmingham firefighter’s ADA lawsuit against the city, while allowing portions of the case to proceed. The suit was brought by Birmingham Firefighter Herman Walker, who alleges the city failed to accommodate his mental health conditions and retaliated against him after he sought transfers away from stations with high levels of violent calls.  

According to the complaint, Firefighter Walker began working for the City of Birmingham in 2011 and spent several years assigned to Station #15, which he alleged handled a large number of violent incidents. In June 2021, he was hospitalized and diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, and anxiety. He alleged that his physician provided documentation stating that his assignment at Station #15 was negatively affecting his mental health and recommending a transfer. Walker claimed the city refused the request.  

The complaint alleged that Walker was hospitalized again in August 2023 for stress, anxiety, depression, and PTSD. A doctor again recommended reassignment to a station with fewer “potentially traumatic or dangerous situations.” The city later transferred him to Station #16, but Walker alleged it presented a similar environment to Station #15.  

Walker filed an EEOC charge in March 2024 alleging disability discrimination and retaliation. According to the court, the charge alleged that Assistant Chief Larry Brown accused Walker of falsifying medical documentation related to an on-duty injury, required him to resubmit doctor’s notes, and initiated determination hearings. Walker also alleged retaliation after requesting a transfer to a station with “less violence because of the ailments [he] had developed.”  

The lawsuit also alleged that Walker later took a lieutenant promotional examination and was initially informed that his score and seniority made him the most likely candidate for promotion. Months later, he was allegedly told his score was too low for consideration. Walker claimed he asked for an explanation but did not receive one.  

Walker further alleged that in July 2025 he was prevented from returning to work after arriving late because supervisors required him to complete paperwork normally associated with returning from an on-duty injury, despite not having suffered such an injury. He alleged the city did not approve his return to work until October 2025.  

Walker’s lawsuit asserted three ADA claims: failure to accommodate, discriminatory failure to promote, and retaliation.  

U.S. District Judge Annemarie Carney Axon ruled that any ADA claims based on actions occurring more than 180 days before Walker filed his March 2024 EEOC charge were time-barred and dismissed those claims with prejudice. However, the court allowed those earlier events to remain in the complaint as background information.  

The court dismissed Walker’s failure-to-promote claim without prejudice, concluding that he had not exhausted his administrative remedies because the promotional allegations were not included in his original EEOC charge. The court explained that the EEOC charge focused on medical documentation, transfer requests, and alleged retaliation, and “had nothing to do with a promotion that he had not yet applied for.”  

The court also found Walker’s retaliation claim unclear because it was uncertain which protected activities and/or alleged retaliatory acts formed the basis of the claim. The opinion noted ambiguity over whether the retaliation claim was based on his accommodation requests, his EEOC filing, or both, and whether the alleged retaliatory acts included transfers, denial of return to work, or the promotional decision. The court ordered Walker to file an amended complaint clarifying the retaliation count.  

Walker also conceded that his request for punitive damages should be dismissed. Here is a copy of the decision: