Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
FMLA Burdens of Proof: What You Need to Know
An important and developing issue under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA or Act) is the appropriate burden of proof to be applied in assessing a plaintiff's claim. Soon after the FLMA became law in 1993, courts automatically applied the McDonnell-Douglas burden-shifting analysis in all FMLA cases, as they do when considering many other employment-related claims. After nearly 10 years, however, courts are now focusing more directly on burden shifting issues'and revising, if not clarifying, the law.
For instance, the federal District Court for New Jersey recently applied two different burdens of proof to a plaintiff's two FMLA claims'one alleging denial of reinstatement, and the other alleging retaliation. Parker v. Hahnemann Univ. Hosp., F. Supp. 2d, 2002 WL 31830647 (D.N.J. 2002) (Denying cross motions for summary judgment). On the deprivation-of-rights claim, the court held that once the plaintiff could establish she was denied a right afforded by the FMLA, the burden of proof shifted to the employer to demonstrate that she would have been denied the right even if she had not taken FMLA leave. On her retaliation claim, however, the court followed the McDonnell-Douglas formula and did not shift the burden of proof to the employer. Both plaintiff's attorneys and defense counsel must recognize such distinctions to prosecute or defend FMLA claims successfully.
This premium content is locked for Employment Law Strategist subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year Later
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance Programs
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar Investigations
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
A Lawyer's System for Active Reading
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
Bankruptcy Sales: Finding a Diamond In the Rough
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.