Jacksonville Firefighter Files ADA and FCRA Suit Over Denied Exam Accommodation

A Jacksonville firefighter has filed suit against the City of Jacksonville alleging violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Florida Civil Rights Act (FCRA) for failure to accommodate his disability during a promotional examination.

Paul Stefanko, a firefighter with the Jacksonville Fire and Rescue Department, contends the City denied him a reasonable accommodation for his attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). According to the complaint filed in federal court on September 23, 2025, Stefanko alleges that his disability requires him to convert written exam materials into an audio format—a process that takes significant time.

The complaint explains:

• In advance of the promotional exam, promotional candidates are provided voluminous study materials.
• Historically, sixty days before administration of an exam, promotional candidates are provided with a shorter list of exam materials to study, which correlate with material that will actually appear on the exam.
• For the first time, in advance of the 2022 promotional exam, COJ provided promotional candidates only thirty days to study the shorter list of exam materials.
• Plaintiff is a qualified individual with a disability (ADHD), who, in advance of the promotional examination, provided physician-endorsed accommodations to Defendant related to the promotional exam.
• Plaintiff’s physician-endorsed accommodations included the requirement of additional time to study the exam materials.
• Based on the volume of exam materials released months prior to the exam, it is not feasible for Plaintiff to study the thousands of pages of materials to meaningfully prepare for the exam.
• Studying the exam materials requires significant amounts of time for Plaintiff to convert the exam materials into an audio format (from their printed form), which, in cases where an audio format is not readily available, requires Plaintiff to scan each individual page of content using a special printer that converts each page to audio.
• Taking these steps for even the reduced scope of materials released in the thirty to sixty days in advance of the exam takes upwards of twenty hours. Taking these steps for the full scope of exam materials would take hundreds of hours of time.
• In light of the significant undertaking and time required to even gain access to the exam materials in a format Plaintiff can use due to his disability, in November 2022, approximately one month before the promotional exam was to be administered, Plaintiff requested an additional thirty days to study for the exam.
• For each previous occasion on which Plaintiff had taken the promotional examination, he and all promotional candidates were provided sixty days to study for the examination after COJ released the short-list of study materials.
• COJ denied Plaintiff’s request for an additional thirty days to study and required Plaintiff to take the promotional exam thirty days after the short-list of materials was released, despite having previously provided all candidates with sixty days to study for the exam for decades, as well as COJ’s continued policy of permitted certain non-disabled individuals more than thirty days to study for the exam following the release of the short-list.
• Plaintiff was required to take the promotional examination with only thirty days to study the short-list of materials, and based on the poor performance caused by the denial of accommodations, was not promoted.”

Stefanko filed a charge of discrimination with the EEOC in September 2023. In September 2024, the EEOC found reasonable cause to believe the City had violated the ADA by failing to provide a reasonable accommodation and attempted conciliation. When conciliation failed, the case was referred to the U.S. Department of Justice, which ultimately declined to file suit, giving Stefanko the right to pursue his own action.

The lawsuit alleges the City violated both the ADA and the FCRA by failing to engage in the required interactive process and by denying his request for additional time to study. Stefanko claims that as a result, he performed poorly on the promotional exam and was denied promotion. He is seeking back pay, front pay, compensatory damages, damages for emotional distress, attorneys’ fees, and other relief deemed appropriate by the court.

Here is a copy of the complaint: