A federal court has dismissed a lawsuit filed by Shellie Anne Womack against the District of Columbia Housing Authority (DCHA) for alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The court's ruling, issued on October 23, 2026, allows Womack the opportunity to amend her complaint to address the deficiencies identified by the court.
The case, titled Womack v. District of Columbia Housing Authority, was filed in the District Court of the District of Columbia under Civil Action No. 2025-4425. Womack, who is representing herself, alleged that DCHA failed to accommodate her disability when it denied her request to telework due to complications with her leg. The court's decision is significant as it highlights the challenges faced by individuals with disabilities in the workplace and the legal standards required to prove such claims.
Womack was hired by DCHA as a Housing Program Specialist in September 2021. In April 2024, she requested to work from home due to her leg complications, stating that she could perform her job functions remotely. However, her request was denied on May 3, 2024, and she was instructed to use accrued leave instead. After filing a charge of discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and receiving a right to sue letter, Womack filed her lawsuit in December 2025.
The dispute centers on whether Womack's leg complications constituted a qualifying disability under the ADA and whether DCHA failed to provide reasonable accommodations. The court noted that to establish a claim under the ADA, a plaintiff must show that they have a disability, the employer was aware of the disability, and that the employee could perform their job with reasonable accommodation.
In its ruling, the court found that Womack did not provide sufficient facts to demonstrate that her leg complications substantially limited a major life activity, which is a requirement under the ADA. The court stated, "[W]hile the plaintiff has alleged an impairment—'complications with [her] leg'—she has not provided any facts that would allow the Court to determine that those complications substantially limit one or more major life activities." The court also noted that Womack's complaint lacked details on how her condition affected her ability to perform her job's essential functions.
Magistrate Judge G. Michael Harvey presided over the case and emphasized that while pro se litigants like Womack are held to less stringent standards, they still must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The court granted DCHA's motion to dismiss but allowed Womack the opportunity to file an amended complaint to correct the deficiencies identified in the ruling.
The impact of this ruling is significant for Womack, as it provides her with a chance to strengthen her case by providing more detailed information about her disability and how it affects her work. It also serves as a reminder of the legal standards required for ADA claims, particularly the need to demonstrate that a disability substantially limits a major life activity.
Moving forward, Womack must file her amended complaint by November 23, 2026. The amended complaint should address the concerns raised by the court, including providing more factual details about her disability and how it affects her ability to perform her job. Failure to do so could result in her case being dismissed with prejudice, meaning she would not have another opportunity to bring the claim.
This case highlights the ongoing challenges individuals with disabilities face in the workplace and the importance of understanding the legal requirements for filing discrimination claims. As Womack prepares her amended complaint, her case will continue to be watched closely by advocates for disability rights and employment law.