McFadden v. BALLARD SPAHR ANDREWS & INGERSOLL, LLP

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that Title VII and FMLA retaliation claims operate under “essentially the same analytical framework”
• recognizing that that the district court below “did not pause to consider [the] prima facie case” in “keeping with Brady” in its analysis of the FMLA claim
• affirming that an employee’s request for reassignment to a receptionist position was not a reasonable accommodation where there was no receptionist position available
• affirming that employee’s request to be reassigned to a receptionist position was not reasonable accommodation under the Rehabilitation Act where there was no vacant, available receptionist position
• observing that Title VII and § 1981 retaliation claims have “essentially the same” framework
• noting that plaintiff could succeed in her FMLA interference claim without showing her employer denied leave request as long as she showed interference with exercise of her FMLA rights and prejudice from violation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).