Locker v. HOW SOEL, INC.
151 Idaho 696
| Idaho | 2011Background
- Locker was employed by Logan's Foodtown July 17, 2008–June 1, 2009; she disclosed MS during hiring and was accommodated for MS-related limitations.
- Upon returning from a six-week medical leave for a hysterectomy in June 2009, Locker discussed post-surgery difficulties with a manager.
- She left work on her first day back, reportedly without mentioning MS and alleging she could not continue for that day.
- Logan's Foodtown requested a medical release from Locker's doctor to determine permissible duties; Locker provided no release.
- Locker did not pursue alternatives or inform management of difficulties obtaining the release, despite discussions about job duties and safety.
- The Idaho Department of Labor found Locker ineligible for benefits for quitting; the Industrial Commission later held she was discharged for misconduct and denied benefits, with waiver of FMLA claims and ADA/IHRA considerations.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Locker was discharged for misconduct supported by substantial evidence | Locker argues no misconduct; her departure was due to MS-related limits | Logan's Foodtown required a medical release to determine duties and safety; failure to provide it constituted misconduct | Yes; substantial evidence supports misconduct due to failure to provide release and communicate obstacles |
| Whether ADA/IHRA claims were properly preserved or waived on appeal | Locker preserved ADA/IHRA claims for appeal | Claims were not raised below and were untimely on appeal | Waived; not addressed on the merits |
| Whether attorney fees can be awarded on appeal under Smith v. Washington County | Requests fees under I.C. § 12-117 | Statute does not authorize fees for appeals of administrative decisions | Cannot award attorney fees on appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- Avery v. B & B Rental Toilets, 97 Idaho 611 (Idaho 1976) (insubordination and standard-of-behavior considerations)
- Whittier v. Dep't of Health & Welfare, 137 Idaho 75 (Idaho 2002) (employee must communicate obstacles preventing compliance)
- J.R. Simplot Co. v. Appeals Exam'r, Idaho Dep't of Labor, 131 Idaho 318 (Idaho 1998) (misconduct proof and standard of review for unemployment benefits)
- Smith v. Washington Cnty., 150 Idaho 388 (Idaho 2010) (no attorney-fee award on appeal from administrative decision)
- Adams v. Aspen Water, Inc., 150 Idaho 408 (Idaho 2011) (standard-of-behavior test; reasonableness of employer expectations)
- Teffer v. Twin Falls School Dist. No. 411, 102 Idaho 439 (Idaho 1981) (review standard for factual findings on appeal)