Stacie Feise v. North Broward Hospital District
683 F. App'x 746
11th Cir.2017Background
- Feise, a pediatric emergency nurse at Broward Health, took multiple FMLA leaves in 2012–2013 for serious respiratory issues and was rehired in June 2013; she had positive performance reviews and no prior discipline.
- While on FMLA leave in August 2013 staffing emails noted overtime pressure caused by her absence; supervisor Bock returned as her manager.
- On September 17, 2013, after a night shift, Bock observed Feise with her eyes closed at the nurses’ station and (with HR) viewed surveillance video that Bock interpreted as showing Feise dozing; Feise denied sleeping and said she only closed her eyes during a break.
- Broward Health terminated Feise for sleeping on the job; HR investigator recommended reinstatement after mixed witness statements, but management declined.
- Feise sued for FMLA retaliation, arguing comparators were treated more leniently and that circumstantial evidence (timing, lack of prior discipline, mixed witness statements, overtime emails) showed pretext. The district court granted summary judgment for the employer; the Eleventh Circuit affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether putative comparators were similarly situated | Feise: identified a technologist suspended for sleeping and a technician who abandoned a patient as comparators treated less harshly | Broward Health: comparators differed in job duties, context, and mitigating documentation | Court: Comparators were not "nearly identical"; differences in duties and medical documentation make them unsuitable |
| Whether circumstantial evidence created a jury issue on pretext | Feise: temporal proximity to FMLA, lack of prior discipline, mixed witness statements, overtime emails show pretext | Broward Health: provided legitimate nondiscriminatory reason (sleeping on duty); investigator uncertainty and timing insufficient | Court: Evidence insufficient to show reason was unworthy of credence or that retaliation more likely motivated firing |
| Whether the employer’s honest belief need be true | Feise: focuses on whether she actually slept; employer relied on direct observation and video | Broward Health: decisionmaker’s good-faith belief about misconduct controls, even if mistaken | Court: Pretext analysis centers on employer’s beliefs; an honest belief in a rule violation defeats pretext absent other evidence |
| Role of temporal proximity and other circumstantial facts | Feise: 11 days after return plus spotless record support inference of retaliation | Broward Health: timing alone and perceived misconduct do not establish retaliation | Court: Temporal proximity alone insufficient; courts must not act as super-personnel departments correcting disputed management judgments |
Key Cases Cited
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (burden-shifting framework for discrimination/retaliation)
- Rioux v. City of Atlanta, Ga., 520 F.3d 1269 (comparator must be similarly situated in all relevant respects)
- Flowers v. Troup Cty., Ga., Sch. Dist., 803 F.3d 1327 (courts defer to employer judgments about misconduct severity)
- Sparks v. Pilot Freight Carriers, Inc., 830 F.2d 1554 (pretext may be shown if employer’s asserted reason was fabricated)
- Alvarez v. Royal Atl. Developers, Inc., 610 F.3d 1253 (pretext inquiry centers on employer’s belief, not objective reality)
- St. Mary’s Honor Ctr. v. Hicks, 509 U.S. 502 (plaintiff must show employer’s stated reason is unworthy of credence or that discrimination was true motive)
- Holifield v. Reno, 115 F.3d 1555 (failure to identify a proper comparator can defeat pretext claim)
- Chapman v. AI Transp., 229 F.3d 1012 (courts should not second-guess reasonable personnel decisions)