Maria Escriba v. Foster Poultry Farms, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that an “employer could find itself open to liability for forcing FMLA leave on the unwilling employee”
• holding that the district court did not err in denying 1 costs based in part on the “great economic disparity” between the parties
• explaining that judgment as a matter of law is properly granted only if the evidence “permits only one reasonable conclusion”
• noting that “there are circumstances in which an employee might seek time off but not intend to exercise his or her rights under the FMLA”
• explaining that when declining to award costs under Rule 54(d), courts may consider, among other things, “the plaintiff’s limited financial resources” and “the economic disparity between the parties”
• holding that district court did not abuse its 3 discretion in excusing costs under Rule 54 where the requested costs exceeded the plaintiff’s 4 yearly earnings of $11,622 and noting that the plaintiff’s efforts to secure steady employment after 5 she was terminated had been unsuccessful

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).