37 F.4th 470
8th Cir.2022Background
- Brandt worked part-time for the City of Cedar Falls from 2001 until termination in March 2018; she repeatedly applied (unsuccessfully) for full‑time clerk positions and had an ongoing history of part‑time assignments across departments.
- She took FMLA leave intermittently for TMJ and later for anxiety, depression, and ADHD; her psychiatrist recommended two 10‑minute breaks every two hours, and the City granted intermittent leave but required her to arrive 5 minutes early to make up time.
- Beginning in 2016 Brandt received multiple counseling/disciplinary reports documenting repeated performance deficiencies (errors, inattention, productivity, occasional tardiness) and was suspended once; she was terminated on March 2, 2018 for failure to correct performance issues.
- Brandt alleged age and disability discrimination, hostile work environment, FMLA interference and retaliation, and other ICRA claims; she also reported coworkers’ hostile conduct (e.g., being called an “old hag,” mocking, items thrown) that mostly predated August 2017.
- Procedural posture: Brandt filed an ICRC charge, then sued in state court; defendants removed and moved for summary judgment; the district court granted summary judgment on all claims (except ICRA retaliation, which she did not appeal); Brandt appealed and the Eighth Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| FMLA interference (requiring arrival 5 minutes early) | Brandt argued the arrival requirement interfered with her FMLA rights and she is entitled to damages (including nominal damages). | City argued Brandt suffered no recoverable damages and did not seek equitable relief; FMLA remedies are limited. | Court: Interference found arguable but no recoverable damages claimed; nominal damages are not available under FMLA → summary judgment for defendants. |
| FMLA retaliation (termination) | Brandt contended her FMLA use/requests caused termination; interference may have contributed to firing. | City: legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason—documented performance deficiencies; no causal link or pretext shown. | Court: Even assuming prima facie case, Brandt produced no evidence of pretext; summary judgment affirmed. |
| ICRA age & disability discrimination (failure to promote/termination) | Brandt said she was passed over for full‑time jobs due to age/disability and termination was discriminatory. | City: many failure‑to‑promote claims are time‑barred; termination based on performance; no evidence of pretext. | Court: Failure‑to‑promote claims mostly time‑barred; on merits, City offered legitimate reason and Brandt showed no pretext → summary judgment affirmed. |
| ICRA hostile work environment | Brandt relied on coworker insults, mocking, and late‑period disciplinary reports as continuing harassment. | City: major harassing acts occurred before the 300‑day ICRC filing period; post‑period disciplinary notices concerned performance, not discriminatory harassment. | Court: Hostile environment claims time‑barred; continuing‑violation doctrine inapplicable because later reports were performance‑based → summary judgment affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973) (establishes burden‑shifting framework for discrimination/retaliation claims)
- Ragsdale v. Wolverine World Wide, Inc., 535 U.S. 81 (2002) (FMLA remedies are limited to statutorily enumerated relief)
- Wierman v. Casey’s Gen. Stores, 638 F.3d 984 (8th Cir. 2011) (distinguishes FMLA interference from FMLA retaliation)
- McBurney v. Stew Hansen’s Dodge City, Inc., 398 F.3d 998 (8th Cir. 2005) (plaintiff must show a reasonable likelihood of recoverable damages or equitable relief to avoid summary judgment in FMLA actions)
- Walker v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 240 F.3d 1268 (10th Cir. 2001) (nominal damages not recoverable under the FMLA)
- National R.R. Passenger Corp. v. Morgan, 536 U.S. 101 (2002) (continuing violation doctrine and time‑bar analysis for hostile work environment claims)
- Carter v. Atrium Hosp., 997 F.3d 803 (8th Cir. 2021) (Eighth Circuit applies McDonnell Douglas to ICRA claims at summary judgment)
- Goodpaster v. Schwan’s Home Serv., Inc., 849 N.W.2d 1 (Iowa 2014) (elements for Iowa disability discrimination claim)
- Mormann v. Iowa Workforce Dev., 913 N.W.2d 554 (Iowa 2018) (elements for Iowa age discrimination claim)
- Uzuegbunam v. Preczewski, 141 S. Ct. 792 (2021) (nominal damages satisfy Article III redressability but do not address statutory availability of nominal damages under specialized remedial schemes)