Terry Tilley v. Kalamazoo County Road Comm'n
654 F. App'x 675
| 6th Cir. | 2016Background
- Terry Tilley, a KCRC employee, was assigned three tasks with staggered deadlines in July 2011; he was suspended five days after missing prior deadlines and was later hospitalized on August 1 while finishing the job-description task.
- Tilley’s wife notified KCRC that he would be off the rest of the week; she delivered a physician’s note on August 8 excusing him through October and requested FMLA forms.
- Tilley submitted completed FMLA paperwork on August 17, 2011 — the same day he received a termination letter dated earlier in August.
- The termination letter cited (a) failure to complete the three assigned tasks, (b) inability to locate the emergency pager while Tilley was on duty rotation, and (c) failure to return supervisor calls during his absence.
- On prior appeal the Sixth Circuit held a genuine dispute existed about equitable estoppel on FMLA eligibility; the case returned on the merits of interference and retaliation claims under the FMLA.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether KCRC interfered with Tilley’s FMLA rights (entitlement/interference) | Termination was motivated at least in part by Tilley’s FMLA-protected absence (failure to respond to calls re: pager occurred while on leave) | Employer says contacts were de minimis, and termination was for preexisting performance issues (failure to complete three tasks) | Reversed summary judgment — fact issue exists whether leave contributed to termination; interference claim survives summary judgment |
| Whether KCRC unlawfully retaliated for Tilley’s exercise of FMLA rights | Tilley asserts temporal proximity plus termination letter’s citation of failure to communicate about pager create causal inference | KCRC contends termination followed documented performance problems and formal warnings predating leave | Reversed summary judgment — prima facie retaliation established and factual dispute as to motive exists |
| Whether Tilley gave adequate notice to invoke FMLA protections | Tilley argues spouse’s and his communications put KCRC on notice “as soon as practicable” for unforeseeable leave | KCRC stresses formal FMLA certification arrived after termination and argues notice was untimely | Court: reasonable dispute exists about timing and sufficiency of notice; issue for jury (notice not resolved on summary judgment) |
| Whether supervisor’s limited work-related calls during leave constitute actionable interference | Tilley says disciplining/terminating him for failure to respond to calls vitiates FMLA | KCRC relies on precedent treating brief institutional contacts as permissible and non-disruptive | Court: brief, de minimis calls about the pager did not themselves constitute interference, but terminating for failure to answer may; factual dispute on whether termination was motivated by leave |
Key Cases Cited
- Tilley v. Kalamazoo Cty. Rd. Comm’n, 777 F.3d 303 (6th Cir. 2015) (prior appeal regarding equitable estoppel and eligibility under FMLA)
- Arban v. West Pub. Corp., 345 F.3d 390 (6th Cir. 2003) (distinguishes FMLA interference and retaliation theories and explains when dismissal despite leave is lawful)
- Walton v. Ford Motor Co., 424 F.3d 481 (6th Cir. 2005) (elements of an FMLA interference claim)
- Seeger v. Cincinnati Bell Tel. Co., LLC, 681 F.3d 274 (6th Cir. 2012) (employer motive irrelevant to interference; pretext standards discussed)
- Brenneman v. MedCentral Health Sys., 366 F.3d 412 (6th Cir. 2004) (medical certification requirements for FMLA leave)
- Daugherty v. Sajar Plastics, Inc., 544 F.3d 696 (6th Cir. 2008) (direct-evidence standard for discrimination/retaliation; statements showing animus)