“After describing statements in an email exchange about terminating plaintiff and how hard on business a sales’ rep’s extended medical leave can be, the court concludes, ‘These statements, in conjunction with Lentin’s testimony [about how the job did not have to be eliminated] and the plain language of the November 19 confidential letter, suggest that
FMLA violations
Discussing termination with Plaintiff three days after request for FMLA-qualified leave creates causal connection.
“[T]he court finds that Plaintiff has demonstrated a causal connection between her request for FMLA-qualified leave and her termination, which was discussed with her a mere three days after her FMLA-qualified leave request.”
Hiltabrand v. Direct Energy, LP, 2013 WL 3480532 at *6 (S.D. Tex. July 10, 2013) (Lake, J.).
The mention of employee’s surgery in an email exchange between supervisors recommending termination one day after employee notifies supervisor of impending surgery creates causal connection in FMLA case.
“Plaintiff cites her email dated June 6, 2011, in which Plaintiff informed Coughlin-Rowley that she was scheduled for an eye surgery … Plaintiff also points to Coughlin-Rowley’s email exchange with Atkinson on June 7, 2011, wherein Coughlin-Rowley recommended that Plaintiff’s employment be terminated as of July 1, 2011 [specifically referencing] Plaintiff’s intention to undergo surgery…
When evaluating whether the adverse employment action was causally related to the FMLA protection, the court shall consider the temporal proximity between the FMLA leave and the termination.
“In the case at bar, Plaintiff suffered injury on August 2, 2010. Shortly thereafter, Defendant was made aware that Plaintiff had suffered an injury to his arm and would be at least temporarily unavailable for work. Plaintiff provided and continued to provide all relevant medical paperwork to his employer. Plaintiff further informed Defendant that he…
Plaintiff’s deposition testimony that a review of time records would reflect underreporting of time for FLSA claim creates a fact issue.
“In addition to actually informing Mr. Perkins that he was working, but under-reporting his time, Plaintiff testified that a review of his time records would reflect that he was recording 15 minutes of travel time for a drive … of over 105 miles.”
Arnett v. Sears, Roebuck and Co., 2013 WL 3324070 at *2…
The fact that an employer returned an employee to work after illness does not alone defeat a plaintiff’s claim.
“Further, the question is not what Greystar thought when it returned McMann to work, but what it (and its managers) believed when, three months later, they forced McMann to resign.”
McMann v. Greystar Management Services, LP, CA No. 1:12-CV-909, 2013 WL 6243847 at *5 (W.D. Tex. Dec. 2, 2013) (Austin, J.).
Conflicting evidence regarding whether supervisor put employee on paid or unpaid leave creates a fact issue over whether ultimate employment action happened.
“Considering the evidence in the light most favorable to Plaintiff, she initially chose to leave LHS after Anderson gave her an ultimatum to either follow her directions or clock out, and upon complaining to Ross, he told her not to return to work until he instructed. While there is conflicting evidence of whether Ross promised…
Evidence that plaintiff would have been reinstated if he did not ask for leave, coupled with failure to investigate allegations from co-workers, and failure to list incident in termination letter, raises fact issues as to motive for termination.
“In summation, Chevron has failed to meet its burden and establish as a matter of law that it would have fired Ion despite its retaliatory motive. Chevron’s evidence of Ion’s history of attendance and performance-related deficiencies is insufficient to establish that it would have fired Ion because Chevron chose to address those deficiencies with a…
Failure to list incident in termination letter casts doubt on whether employer truly relied on incident in terminating plaintiff.
“The omission of the clinic incident from the termination letter calls into question whether Chevron truly relied on the clinic incident as a reason for terminating Ion. Second, all accounts of the clinic incident offered by Chevron are vague and include no specific or objective description of Ion’s behavior. The accounts do not describe foul…
Employer cannot establish reasonable reliance and good faith in terminating an employee based on co-workers comments if no investigation was conducted.
“Chevron’s failure to conduct even the most cursory investigation, confront Ion about Peel’s statements, or seek a second opinion under the FMLA calls into doubt Chevron’s reasonable reliance and good faith on Peel’s statements, and, at the very least, creates a fact issue as to whether it would have terminated Ion despite its retaliatory motive.”…
