Gwendolyn Donald v. Sybra, Incorporated
667 F.3d 757
| 6th Cir. | 2012Background
- Donald worked over two years as an Arby’s assistant manager for Sybra in Saginaw, Michigan; she had substantial health issues causing leaves, including 2006 gallbladder surgery and 2007 ovarian cysts/renal stones; she returned Sept 2007 and was transferred to a State Street store under Plum with Houston-Barocko and Ballance supervising; in Feb 2008, receipts showed irregular discounts allegedly pocketed by Donald; after a medical absence, she was terminated on Feb 29, 2008 following an internal investigation; district court granted summary judgment for Sybra, and Donald appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Sybra violated the FMLA by interfering with leave | Donald contends termination during/after leave violates §2615(a)(1). | Sybra had a legitimate, non-discriminatory reason based on theft allegations. | No genuine dispute on pretext; district court did not err in granting summary judgment. |
| Whether Sybra retaliated under the FMLA for taking leave | Donald asserts adverse action followed protected FMLA activity. | Timing and lack of causal connection negate retaliation claim. | Temporal proximity alone insufficient; no pretext shown; dismissal affirmed. |
| Whether ADA & PWDCRA claims survive based on alleged disability and animus | Donald was disabled or regarded as disabled; termination due to disability. | No evidence Donald was regarded as disabled or that disability caused termination; context of remark insufficient. | Claims fail; isolated remark insufficient to establish disability-based discrimination. |
Key Cases Cited
- Grace v. USCAR, 521 F.3d 655 (6th Cir. 2008) (applies McDonnell Douglas framework to FMLA interference claims)
- Skrjanc v. Great Lakes Power Serv. Co., 272 F.3d 309 (6th Cir. 2001) (temporal proximity alone not enough for pretext)
- Todd v. City of Cincinnati, 436 F.3d 635 (6th Cir. 2006) (reversal based on employer's belief of inability to work as a disability issue)
- Wysong v. Dow Chem. Co., 503 F.3d 441 (6th Cir. 2007) (establishes framework for preliminary FMLA interference/retaliation analysis)
- Majewski v. Automatic Data Processing, Inc., 274 F.3d 1106 (6th Cir. 2001) (illustrates material facts needed for employment decision validity)