Sanders v. City of Newport
657 F.3d 772
| 9th Cir. | 2011Background
- Sanders, a city utility billing clerk, developed multiple chemical sensitivity from workplace changes and took FMLA/OFLA leave.
- City could not guarantee a safe workplace due to Sanders's condition and terminated reinstatement after leave.
- District court held a bifurcated trial: jury decided FMLA damages; equity claim under OFLA heard by the court.
- Jury found no FMLA violation; district court found OFLA violation and awarded damages and fees.
- Sanders and City both appealed; court vacated on FMLA, remanded, and vacated OFLA judgment to reconsider after retrial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the FMLA interference instruction correctly allocated burden of proof. | Sanders contends City had to prove lack of reinstatement was with no reasonable cause. | City contends Sanders bears burden or that reasonable cause is an affirmative defense. | Instruction error; burden improperly placed on Sanders. |
| Whether the district court's reliance on reasonable cause was consistent with FMLA regulations. | Interference claim does not require proving lack of reasonable cause. | Employer may show legitimate reason to deny reinstatement under regs. | Regulatory text assigns the burden to employer; error to require no reasonable cause. |
| Whether the FMLA error was harmless and whether OFLA should be reconsidered. | Error prejudiced Sanders and tainted OFLA verdict. | Error harmless if City proved inability to reinstate per regs. | Error not harmless; OFLA judgment vacated and remanded after retrial. |
Key Cases Cited
- Bachelder v. Am. W. Airlines, Inc., 259 F.3d 1112 (9th Cir. 2001) (interference claim; reinstatement rights; entitlement theory no McDonnell Douglas burden)
- Xin Liu v. Amway Corp., 347 F.3d 1125 (9th Cir. 2003) (discusses entitlement and burden in FMLA interference; rejection of McDonnell Douglas framework)
- Gambini v. Total Renal Care, Inc., 486 F.3d 1087 (9th Cir. 2007) (burden issue left undecided; relevance to FMLA instruction)
- Smith v. Diffee Ford-Lincoln-Mercury, Inc., 298 F.3d 955 (10th Cir. 2002) (burden shifting in FMLA retaliation/interference context; cited for burden concepts)
- Throneberry v. McGehee Desha Cnty Hosp., 403 F.3d 972 (8th Cir. 2005) (limitations on reinstatement under FMLA regs; burden shift discussion)
- Rice v. Sunrise Express, Inc., 209 F.3d 1008 (7th Cir. 2000) (burden on employer under FMLA reinstatement provisions)
- Burnett v. LFW Inc., 472 F.3d 471 (7th Cir. 2006) (elements of prima facie FMLA reinstatement claim)
- Edgar v. JAC Prods., Inc., 443 F.3d 501 (6th Cir. 2006) (interference vs retaliation; reinstatement rights)
- Hodgens v. Gen. Dynamics Corp., 144 F.3d 151 (1st Cir. 1998) (FMLA burden and reinstatement context)
- Strickland v. Water Works & Sewer Bd. of Birmingham, 239 F.3d 1199 (11th Cir. 2001) (interference claims; burden considerations)