Ricardo Diaz v. Michigan Dep't of Corrections
703 F.3d 956
| 6th Cir. | 2013Background
- Diaz, an MDOC employee, alleged intermittent self-care leave due to heart and abdominal conditions and claimed time-and-attendance-based termination after taking leave.
- Boden, an MDHS employee, alleged supervisor discrimination and retaliation for self-care leave.
- Diaz asserted §1983 claims (interference and retaliation) and sought retroactive damages and prospective reinstatement via Ex parte Young; Boden asserted similar §1983 claims and sought prospective injunctive relief.
- The district court dismissed Diaz’s and Boden’s FMLA claims as barred by the comprehensive remedial scheme and rejected the Ex parte Young claim for reinstatement; Boden’s state-law claims were also dismissed.
- The Sixth Circuit held §1983 damages claims against state actors for the FMLA self-care provision are barred; the Ex parte Young remedy for reinstatement can proceed, on remand, for Diaz if an ongoing violation is shown; Boden’s claims were properly dismissed.
- Key precedents discussed include Hibbs, Touvell, Coleman, Middlesex Sea Clammers, Rancho Palos Verdes, Verizon Maryland, Carten, and Seminole Tribe.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether §1983 ‘and laws’ claims can enforce FMLA self-care rights against state officials in their individual capacities | Diaz/Boden argue §1983 can reach self-care rights. | MDOC/MDHS contend no individual liability for FMLA self-care; remedies barred by sovereign immunity and statutory structure. | Damages claims are barred; no private right to monetary relief against state officials. |
| Whether Ex parte Young allows prospective relief (reinstatement) against state officials for FMLA self-care violations | Diaz seeks reinstatement as prospective relief under Ex parte Young. | Ex parte Young forecloses such relief or requires merited ongoing FMLA merits review first. | Diaz’s claim for reinstatement is potentially viable; Ex parte Young relief not barred at this stage. |
| Whether the FMLA self-care damages provision is constitutional as applied to states, given Coleman/Touvell | Self-care damages should be available under §1983 despite Coleman/Touvell. | Coleman/Touvell foreclose damages under the self-care provision due to sovereign immunity. | Damages claims under the self-care provision are precluded; FMLA’s remedial scheme is comprehensive and exclusive for damages. |
| Whether the FMLA remedial provisions are comprehensive and exclude §1983 remedies | §1983 provides an independent remedy and should survive as a supplementary path. | FMLA’s express remedies are comprehensive, precluding §1983 damages. | The remedial provisions are comprehensive and preclude availing §1983 damages. |
| Whether Boden’s claims regarding prospective relief could be maintained under Ex parte Young | Boden seeks ongoing equitable relief against the supervisor in official capacity. | District court dismissed for lack of jurisdiction due to ongoing merits questions. | Affirmed district court's dismissal of Boden; issue not pursued on appeal. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hibbs v. Wolff, 538 U.S. 721 (Supreme Court 2003) (abrogation of state immunity for family-care provision)
- Touvell v. Ohio Dept. of Mental Retardation & Developmental Disabilities, 422 F.3d 392 (6th Cir. 2005) (self-care provision not abrogated; no damages against states)
- Coleman v. Court of Appeals of Md., 132 S. Ct. 1327 (Supreme Court 2012) (sovereign immunity respected; damages under self-care barred)
- Middlesex County Sewerage Authority v. National Sea Clammers Association, 453 U.S. 1 (Supreme Court 1981) (Sea Clammers doctrine; limits on federal claims when statutes have enforcement provisions)
- Rancho Palos Verdes v. Abrams, 544 U.S. 113 (Supreme Court 2005) (exclusive remedies when federal acts provide remedies)
- Verizon Maryland Inc. v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n of Md., 535 U.S. 635 (Supreme Court 2002) (Ex parte Young requires ongoing federal enforcement inquiry without merits review)
- Carten v. Kent State University, 282 F.3d 391 (6th Cir. 2002) (ex parte Young notion for reinstatement relief)
- Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida, 517 U.S. 44 (Supreme Court 1996) (limit on Ex parte Young where remedial scheme is intricate)