Kentucky Personal Injury Lawyer Blog

Recently, in June of 2010, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio heard a case regarding the FMLA and the issue of the employer’s request for time off policy. (See Coffman v. Ford Motor Co., 2010 WL 2465376 (S.D.Ohio)).

The Plaintiff in this case was part of a union within Defendant’s company. Pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement, Plaintiff had certain procedures to follow if she wanted to take time off and have it considered FMLA leave. One of the things the employee had to do was have her physician fill out a medical certification form. Id. In this company, they had a policy where after the fourth awol occurrence you were disciplined up until the tenth awol occurrence at which point you were automatically terminated. Id. The Plaintiff in this case was fired on July 25, 2005. Id. Plaintiff with her FMLA lawyer initiated her FMLA lawsuit against the Defendant on July 23, 2008. Id. (If you are a recently fired employee and think you were entitled to FMLA leave, and it is still within 2 years (3 if the actions were willful against you), then you should contact Louisville FMLA lawyer Andrew S. Alitowski right away.)

Continue reading "Family and Medical Leave Act Case Involving Questions as to Employer’s Policy." »

Recently, in April of 2010, the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan heard a case regarding the FMLA and the issue of violating Defendant’s three day no call/no show rule. (See Bradford v. Challenge manufacturing Co., 2010 WL 1758243 (W.D.Mich.))

“The FMLA provides two types of claims or theories of liability. (cites omitted). The first theory is the “entitlement” or “interference” theory, which is based upon the substantive rights created by the FMLA. (cites omitted). An employer is liability under this theory if it interferes with an employee’s FMLA created right to medical leave or to reinstatement following the leave. (cites omitted). The second type of FMLA claim is a “retaliation” or “discrimination” theory, which arises under …. That provision states that “it shall be unlawful for any employer to discharge or in any other manner discriminate against any individual for opposing any practice made unlawful by this title.” (cites omitted). Id. Plaintiff in this FMLA case asserted both claims. (Louisville FMLA lawyer Andrew Alitowski could explain to you these facts in better detail if you so desired).

Continue reading "Kentucky Family and Medical Leave Act Case." »

Issue: Did the employer interfere with employee’s FMLA rights by not explaining to employee how her FMLA was to be calculated and how much time she had left?

In Highlands Hospital Corporation v. Preece, 2010 WL 569745 (Ky.App.), the Kentucky Court of Appeals held that the employer did violate the employee’s FMLA rights. The reasons are as follows.

Ms. Preece began working for the defendant as a Certified Nursing Assistant in July of 2000. Id. In April of 2004 she discovered she was pregnant. Id. She went to her HR person and was told she had 12 weeks of leave available but was not told how that leave was to be calculated. Id. Plaintiff was never informed she could use her accumulated vacation and sick days instead of FMLA leave. Id. Beginning June 16, 2004 up until the birth of her child on October 21, 2004, Plaintiff took intermittent leave. Id. She did not know that her time off was going towards her FMLA leave. Id.

Continue reading "Kentucky FMLA Case Update: Back Pay and Front Pay Awards Upheld." »

Recently, in the Federal Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, an FMLA case was heard in May of 2009. This case revolved around a female nurse practitioner who had sued her employer, the Church of Christ Home for the Aged. The lower district court had granted the employer summary judgment on Ms. Lafata’s Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) claims.

In February of 2000, Ms. Lafata began working as a licensed practical nurse for the defendant at its assisted living facility. In November of 2000, Ms. Lafata hurt her shoulder while at work lifting a patient. In April of 2002, Ms. Lafata was promoted and became the Health Services Coordinator at the assisted living facility. In February of 2003, Ms. Lafata fell in her driveway at home and fractured her foot. It was placed in a cast. She returned to work 2 weeks later in March of 2003. But, after a short period of time, Ms. Lafata realized that she could not perform her duties and accordingly, a few weeks later got a note from her doctor and requested FMLA leave and disability leave from her boss. But, Ms. Lafata only received the disability forms and not the FMLA forms. She subsequently collected disability payments while on leave for her foot injury.

Two months later, Ms. Lafata received a letter at home informing her that her employer had filled her position. She subsequently filed a complaint with the Department of Labor (DOL). The DOL determined that the employer failed to comply with applicable notice requirements under the FMLA. Thus, following this investigation, the employer gave Ms. Lafata twelve weeks of unpaid leave beginning July 28, 2003 to October 20, 2003. Ms. Lafata gave her employer a doctor’s note stating that she could return to work.

Prior to returning to work, Ms. Lafata spoke to her employer and the discussion of what she was going to do came up. The employer told Ms. Lafata that the only position available was that of a Restorative License Nurse. Ms. Lafata told her employer that she could not do that as it required lifting and was not an “equivalent position” to the one she held before which was Health Services Coordinator. Her employer told her that was what was being offered and to take it or leave it. Ms. Lafata ultimately did not return to work and filed a charge of discrimination with the EEOC and after receiving a right to sue letter, filed her lawsuit. She hired a FMLA lawyer.

The below is a good video explaining FMLA. And if you watch this video, there are many other related videos that come up along with it that you can watch as well.

Continue reading "Kentucky Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) Discrimination Case" »