989 F.3d 135
1st Cir.2021Background:
- Thompson worked for Gold Medal Bakery since 1979; underwent right-knee replacement on May 9, 2016 and requested FMLA leave.
- Gold Medal approved FMLA leave (12 weeks) and required a fitness-for-duty certificate to return; Thompson’s post-surgery follow-up was initially set for August 12 but moved to August 17.
- Gold Medal informed Thompson his leave expired August 1 (later told him to return August 12); Marquez briefly communicated an extension to August 17 but management rescinded it; Gold Medal terminated Thompson effective August 12 for exhausting leave and failing to produce the required certificate.
- On August 17 the treating physician certified Thompson had returned to prior level of functioning and had no functional limitations (avoid squatting only).
- On August 23 Thompson applied for SSDI, swearing he became unable to work on May 8, 2016 and was "still disabled" as of filing; SSA found him disabled as of May 8 and awarded benefits beginning November 2016.
- Thompson sued for ADA and Massachusetts disability discrimination (failure to accommodate and wrongful discharge) and for FMLA retaliation; district court granted summary judgment to Gold Medal on disability claims (based on Cleveland/judicial estoppel) and on the FMLA retaliation claim; this appeal followed.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Thompson can satisfy the ADA "qualified individual" element despite sworn SSDI statements that he was disabled as of May 8 | Thompson: He could have returned to work on Aug 12; any later total disability reflected in SSA decision resulted from deterioration after firing | Gold Medal: Thompson’s sworn SSDI statements (May 8 onset; still disabled on Aug 23) preclude contradicting that he was totally unable to work during the relevant period | Court: Affirmed for Gold Medal; applying Cleveland, Thompson failed to offer an explanation reconciling the SSA statements with ADA "qualified individual" requirement |
| Whether state-law disability claims survive given the SSDI statements | Thompson: State claims are parallel to federal ADA claims and should proceed | Gold Medal: Same estoppel/consistency argument applies to state claims | Court: Affirmed dismissal of state claims for same reasons as ADA claims |
| Whether Gold Medal’s termination constituted FMLA retaliation | Thompson: Close temporal proximity, inconsistent handling of leave, and pretext show retaliation for taking FMLA leave | Gold Medal: Termination was for legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason—failure to provide a fitness-for-duty certificate after leave—and such requirement is lawful and uniformly applied | Court: Affirmed for Gold Medal; plaintiff failed to show pretext or inconsistent application sufficient to raise a genuine dispute |
Key Cases Cited
- Cleveland v. Policy Management Sys. Corp., 526 U.S. 795 (1999) (a plaintiff who obtained SSDI must explain why sworn disability statements are consistent with ADA "qualified individual" claim)
- Hodgens v. Gen. Dynamics Corp., 144 F.3d 151 (1st Cir. 1998) (FMLA retaliation framework and employer burden to articulate legitimate nondiscriminatory reason)
- Bellone v. Southwick-Tolland Reg'l Sch. Dist., 748 F.3d 418 (1st Cir. 2014) (upholding termination where employee failed to return after FMLA leave and did not provide required fitness-for-duty certificate)
- Pena v. Honeywell Int'l, Inc., 923 F.3d 18 (1st Cir. 2019) (application of Cleveland to bar ADA claims where plaintiff repeatedly represented inability to work to SSA)