Campbell v. Gambro Healthcare, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that “a retaliation claim may be brought when the employee successfully took FMLA leave, was restored to her prior employment status, and was adversely affected by an employment action based on incidents post-dating her return to work”
• rejecting FMLA retaliation argument at pretext stage about hours reduction that similarly impacted other employees who had not taken FMLA leave
• plaintiff made prima facie interference claim where “termination was a foregone conclusion by the time she returned to work, and her ‘restoration’ to her prior duties during the period of January 5-14, 2004 was illusory”
• discipline based on policy violations was not evidence of pretext
• “To hold otherwise would create a perverse incentive for employers to make the decision to terminate during an employee’s FMLA leave, but allow the employee to return for a brief period before terminating her so as to insulate the employer from an interference claim.”
• “Due to this difference in where the burden lies with respect to the third element of each theory, it is not unusual for a plaintiff to pursue an interference theory while the defendant argues that the evidence may only be analyzed under a retaliation theory.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).