Darst Ex Rel. Bankruptcy Estate of Chalimoniuk v. Interstate Brands Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that on summary judgment, the Court views the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party and draws all reasonable inferences in that party's favor
• granting summary judgment because plaintiff offered no evidence that he was being treated, or even evaluated for treatment, on the three days immediately preceding his inpatient hospitalization for alcoholism
• “[A]bsence because of the employee’s use of the substance, rather than for treatment, does not qualify for FMLA leave.”
• “But even if [employer] was obliged to advise [employee] that his certification was incomplete, there was no harm caused by [employer’s] breach of this obligation unless did
• “But even if [employer] was obliged to advise [employee] that his certification was incomplete, there was no harm caused by [employer’s] breach of this obligation unless did
• employer legitimately terminated Darst for taking leave to which he had not been entitled under the FMLA as he was not seeking treatment for alcoholism at the time

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).