981 F.3d 1265
11th Cir.2020Background
- Munoz was an executive leasing assistant at Selig (2005–2013); she developed uterine fibroids, ovarian cysts, and endometriosis beginning in 2011 and sought intermittent leave for pain, appointments, and treatment.
- She emailed supervisors about illness-related lateness/absences on multiple occasions; Selig never provided FMLA certification forms or told her about FMLA eligibility.
- Supervisors documented long-standing performance issues (tardiness predating illness, alleged off-task personal activity, defensiveness) and drafted a May 22, 2013 Performance Memorandum threatening further discipline up to termination.
- At the June 6, 2013 meeting Munoz refused to sign the Memo, stating her medical need for occasional leave; she was terminated at that meeting.
- Munoz sued under the ADA and FMLA. District court granted summary judgment for Selig on all claims; the Eleventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment on ADA and FMLA-interference claims but reversed as to FMLA-retaliation and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| ADA disability (whether Munoz was disabled under ADA) | Munoz said fibroids/cysts/endometriosis substantially limited sleep, work, reproduction. | Selig: record lacks evidence of severity/frequency/duration; no substantial limitation. | Court: Affirmed summary judgment for Selig—Munoz failed to show substantial limitation during employment. |
| FMLA interference (failure to notify eligibility; harm) | Selig withheld notice of FMLA rights; that interference harmed Munoz (led to termination). | Selig: Munoz was not denied leave and suffered no damages from nondisclosure. | Court: Affirmed summary judgment—no demonstrable damages from failure to notify. |
| FMLA retaliation — intending to use future FMLA leave | Munoz told supervisors she would need intermittent FMLA-qualifying leave; termination shortly after shows causal link and pretext (comments like "nobody's sick that long"). | Selig: terminated for insubordination, defensiveness, off-task personal activity; reasons preexisted protected conduct. | Court: Reversed summary judgment—triable issues on protected notice, causation, and pretext; remand for retaliation claim. |
| FMLA retaliation — refusal to sign Performance Memo (opposition to unlawful practice) | Munoz refused to sign because she reasonably believed signing would waive/limit FMLA rights; termination was retaliation for opposing unlawful practice. | Selig: signature merely acknowledged receipt; signing did not waive rights; prior 2010 memo shows acknowledgement is routine. | Court: Reversed summary judgment—material factual disputes about what supervisors said at the meeting and whether Munoz’s belief was objectively reasonable; jury must decide. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mazzeo v. Color Resolutions Int’l, LLC, 746 F.3d 1264 (11th Cir. 2014) (ADA elements for a discrimination/accommodation claim)
- Rossbach v. City of Miami, 371 F.3d 1354 (11th Cir. 2004) (definition of disability and major life activities under ADA)
- Lewis v. City of Union City, 934 F.3d 1169 (11th Cir. 2019) (insufficient evidence of frequency/duration defeats ADA disability showing)
- Bragdon v. Abbott, 524 U.S. 624 (1998) (reproductive functions are a major life activity under the ADA)
- Cash v. Smith, 231 F.3d 1301 (11th Cir. 2000) (must show substantial limitation at time of employment action)
- Batson v. Salvation Army, 897 F.3d 1320 (11th Cir. 2018) (FMLA entitlement and interference framework)
- Graham v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Co., 193 F.3d 1274 (11th Cir. 1999) (FMLA nondisclosure damages requirement and analysis)
- Pereda v. Brookdale Senior Living Cmtys., Inc., 666 F.3d 1269 (11th Cir. 2012) (notice of intent to use FMLA leave is protected activity)
- White v. Beltram Edge Tool Supply, Inc., 789 F.3d 1188 (11th Cir. 2015) (foreseeable vs. unforeseeable FMLA notice requirements)
- Strickland v. Water Works & Sewer Bd. of Birmingham, 239 F.3d 1199 (11th Cir. 2001) (unforeseeable flare-ups can satisfy notice standard)
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973) (burden-shifting framework for retaliation claims)
- Jones v. Gulf Coast Health Care of Del., LLC, 854 F.3d 1261 (11th Cir. 2017) (comments about misuse of FMLA and temporal proximity can support pretext)
- Hurlbert v. St. Mary’s Health Care Sys., Inc., 439 F.3d 1286 (11th Cir. 2006) (temporal proximity and pretext analysis)