LawMemo - First in Employment Law

Ross Runkel, editor

LawMemo's reason for being: We publish Employment Law Memo - summaries of latest court decisions, one-click links to full text, three emails per week.   Try it. 
Editor: Ross Runkel, Professor of Law Emeritus. email Ross@LawMemo.Com, Phone 503-399-8028. 


LawMemo Employment Law Blog 
All Archives    |    All Archives By Topic 
Also read LawMemo Arbitration Blog


« ADEA cert petition | Main | Davenport v WEA developments »

Multiple medical leave claims
May 11, 2007 by Ross Runkel at LawMemo

Michael Faust filed multiple claims against his former employer, all arising out of his back pain, and a note from his chiropractor:

  • discharge in violation of his right to medical leave under the California Family Rights Act (CFRA) (a part of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA))
  • retaliation
  • wrongful discharge
  • disability discrimination

The trial court granted summary judgment for the employer,but the California Court of Appeal reversed as to most of Faust's claims. Faust v. California Portland Cement (California Ct App 05/10/2007)

Faust was experiencing severe back pain. His treating chiropractor provided a note recommending treatment and stating that he was "unable to perform regular job duties" for a month. Faust gave the note to his employer. In an exchange of voicemails the employer requested to speak to him about the chiropractor's report. Faust stated that the employer could speak to his wife, chiropractor, or workers compensation attorney, but the employer did not. Faust did not reply to a letter detailing perceived defects in the chiropractor's report. Later the employer discharged Faust, stating that his paperwork was "insufficient to sustain an approved absence."

The California Court of Appeal held:

  1. There was a triable issue on Faust's CFRA claims because the employer did not post notice or give notice to Faust of his CFRA rights, Faust provided notice of his need for CFRA leave, and Faust's chiropractor's report stated the reason for CFRA leave. Although the employer claimed that Faust unreasonably failed to respond to inquiries about his health, another possible inference is that the employer unreasonably refused to communicate with his designated representatives. The court rejected the employer's assertion that Faust's chiropractor was not a qualified health care provider.
  2. There was a triable issue on Faust's claim of retaliation for exercising CFRA rights because he presented a prima facie case, and the employer's assertion that it discharged him for insubordination (taking an unauthorized leave) was undermined by the employer's refusal to communicate with any of Faust's representatives.
  3. There was a triable issue on Faust's claim of wrongful termination in violation of public policy. Because he has viable claims for violation of the CFRA, "it necessarily follows" that he has a triable issue for wrongful termination in violation of public policy.
  4. There was a triable issue on Faust's claim of disability discrimination. There was evidence that the employer was aware of his orthopedic condition, that the employer rejected the chiropractor's recommendation of a leave, and that the employer discharged Faust. The asserted insubordination (taking an unauthorized leave) was undermined by the employer's refusal to communicate with any of Faust's representatives.


LawMemo.Com


Google
 
Web www.LawMemo.com 
This form will search the LawMemo web site. It does not include the Caselaw Database.
  • Employment Law Memo emails designed for lawyers. 
  • Expert summaries of decisions from all federal and state appellate courts. 
  • Direct link to full text. 
  • Click here for free 4-week subscription 
 

Home | Free Trial | Products & Prices | Feeds | Caselaw Database | Sample   
EEOC
| NLRB | Nat'l Arbitration Ctr | Supreme Court | Articles | Lawyers
Employment Law BlogArbitration Blog | Employment Law 101    
Employment Law Memo | NLRB Law Memo | Arbitration Law Memo

Editor: Ross Runkel, Professor of Law Emeritus. email Ross@LawMemo.Com, Phone 503-399-8028. Copyright LawMemo, Inc.