A physician advised USPS that the plaintiff’s symptoms flared up twice per month, but the court held that this note alone did not create an exact limit.
- A district court erred when it granted a partial victory to the U.S. Postal Service in a former mail clerk’s Family and Medical Leave Act lawsuit because the court wrongly interpreted a FMLA medical certification as placing a “hard cap” on unforeseeable intermittent leave, the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said in an Aug. 21 decision.
- The plaintiff in Jackson v. USPS took FLMA leave to care for flare-ups associated with sickle cell anemia. He was approved to take two days of intermittent FMLA leave per month for his condition, but USPS also limited the number of unscheduled absences he could take. USPS terminated the plaintiff after he allegedly exceeded this limit, but the plaintiff disputed USPS’ conclusion that the unscheduled absences were not covered by the FMLA.
- The plaintiff alleged USPS violated both the FMLA and the Rehabilitation Act by firing him. A district court partially granted summary judgment to USPS, holding that the amount of absences exceeded the plaintiff’s two-day-per-month FMLA cap. The 6th Circuit reversed, however, stating that a hard cap could not be provided for the plaintiff’s condition because his flare-ups required intermittent, unforeseeable leave.
