Jeffrey Bonkowski v. Oberg Industries Inc
787 F.3d 190
3rd Cir.2015Background
- Employee Jeffrey Bonkowski, with preexisting heart and diabetes conditions, went to Butler Memorial Hospital late Nov. 14, 2011, arrived shortly before midnight, was formally admitted shortly after midnight (Nov. 15), and discharged early evening Nov. 15.
- Bonkowski was terminated by employer Oberg for walking off the job; he sued under the FMLA alleging interference and retaliation based on a qualifying "serious health condition."
- The dispositive statutory question was whether Bonkowski’s hospital stay constituted "inpatient care" under 29 U.S.C. § 2611(11)(A), as defined by DOL regulation 29 C.F.R. § 825.114: "an overnight stay in a hospital...".
- The District Court adopted a sunset-to-sunrise definition of "overnight" (requiring presence for the whole night) and granted summary judgment for Oberg because Bonkowski’s formal admission and discharge occurred on the same calendar day.
- The Third Circuit rejected the sunset-sunrise test and an open-ended "totality of the circumstances" standard, adopting a bright-line rule measuring an "overnight stay" by admission and discharge across calendar days for a substantial period.
- Applying that rule (admission and discharge must span one calendar day to the next), the Court affirmed summary judgment because Bonkowski was admitted and discharged on Nov. 15 and thus did not satisfy § 825.114.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| How to interpret DOL’s "an overnight stay" in 29 C.F.R. § 825.114 | Totality of circumstances could show Bonkowski stayed overnight (arrival before midnight, inpatient designation, lengthy stay, testing, doctor’s note) | Measured by admission and discharge across calendar days (bright-line) | Court: "overnight stay" means stay spanning one calendar day to the next measured by admission and discharge, requiring a substantial period across days |
| Whether time of arrival (pre-admission observation/ER time) counts as inpatient time | Arrival before midnight should count toward overnight stay | Only formal admission triggers inpatient "overnight" calculation | Court follows Landers reasoning: inpatient status is triggered by formal admission, not mere arrival/ER observation |
| Whether the District Court’s sunset-to-sunrise test is appropriate | Plaintiff argued District Court’s rule was too narrow and produced arbitrary outcomes | Oberg defended a more objective rule; District Court used sunset-sunrise | Court: rejects sunset–sunrise as unworkable/absurd (varies by geography/season) |
| Whether the record created a triable issue of fact on "inpatient care" | Plaintiff: factual record supports jury finding under broad construction of FMLA | Defendant: no qualifying inpatient stay as a matter of law | Court: legal definition resolved against plaintiff; no triable issue because admission and discharge occurred same calendar day |
Key Cases Cited
- Estate of Landers v. Leavitt, 545 F.3d 98 (2d Cir. 2008) (agency practice supporting formal-admission rule for inpatient status persuasive; preadmission ER/observation time does not count as inpatient time)
- Schaar v. Lehigh Valley Health Servs., Inc., 598 F.3d 156 (3d Cir. 2010) (courts interpret FMLA regulations as questions of law and may decide what regulatory terms mean before assessing factual disputes)
- Victorelli v. Shadyside Hospital, 128 F.3d 184 (3d Cir. 1997) (court conducts independent interpretation of DOL regulations; factual questions may remain about whether condition meets "serious health condition")
- Haybarger v. Lawrence Cnty. Adult Prob. & Parole, 667 F.3d 408 (3d Cir. 2012) (court may formulate multi-factor standards in some contexts but must interpret statutory/regulatory terms as law)