Daniel R. Arban, Plaintiff-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. West Publishing Corp., Defendant-Appellant/cross-Appellee

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that terminating an employee’s employment for refusing to perform a work-related task while on medical leave amounts to interference with FMLA rights
• holding that “there was sufficient evidence to support the jury’s conclusion that West retaliated against Arban for taking leave under the FMLA”
• holding that the district court abused its discretion in denying liquidated damages because, in its good-faith finding, the court relied on employer’s nonretaliatory reason for its conduct, which the jury rejected by finding intentional retaliation
• stating that “[interfering with” an employee’s rights under the Act includes “discouraging an employee from using leave.”
• holding that there was sufficient evidence for a jury to find interference where during plaintiffs leave, his supervisor called him multiple times, asked him to gather customer lists and pending sales, and requested that he meet with the supervisor
• explaining that employees are entitled to no greater protection against employment actions that would have occurred regardless of their leave

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).