home

New Cases and Developments

NACUA's Legal Resources staff summarizes current higher education cases and developments and provides the full text of selected cases to members. New cases and developments are archived here for up to 12 months.  Cases provided by Fastcase, Inc.

Dates
New Search
Retaliation; Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA); Faculty & Staff

Carlson v. Chippewa Valley Technical College (W.D. Wis. May 11, 2018)

Opinion and Order granting Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff, a nursing instructor at Chippewa Valley Technical College (CVTC), alleged that CVTC’s decision to remove her from a special assignment after she took two weeks of medical leave violated the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA), breached her employment contract, and breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Defendant contended that it removed Plaintiff from her special assignment based on her difficulty working with other colleagues, among other reasons. In awarding judgment to the Defendant, the court concluded that no reasonable jury could find that Defendant’s legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for removing Plaintiff from her special assignment were unlawfully motivated by Plaintiff having taken FMLA leave.  Although the timing of Plaintiff’s removal from her special assignment was suspicious, that alone was not enough to defeat summary judgment because Plaintiff’s difficulty working with other colleagues was not genuinely disputed, and the problems persisted after she returned from FMLA leave. The court discredited Plaintiff’s allegation that CVTC expected her to do work while on FMLA leave.  An email directing Plaintiff to “develop a plan of continuation of the project while on FML,” was merely an expectation that Plaintiff “plan for her leave” by reassigning or delegating duties, not an expectation that Plaintiff work during her leave. The court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s state law claims.

5/18/2018
read
Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA); Faculty & Staff

Cutliffe v. Wright State University (S.D. Oh. Jan. 9, 2018)

Report and Recommendation to deny Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend.  Plaintiff sought to amend his complaint against Wright State University to include a claim for monetary damages under the Family & Medical Leave Act’s (FMLA) self-care provision.  In determining that amendment would be futile, the court found that the Defendant, as a public institution, would be immune from any claim for monetary damages under FMLA.  Moreover, because Plaintiff was no longer employed at Wright State University, he could not reasonably allege an ongoing FMLA violation, such that he would be able to support a plausible claim for injunctive relief.

1/11/2018
read
Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA); Faculty & Staff; Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA); Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity

Maliandi v. Montclair State University (D.N.J. July 17, 2017)

Opinion affirming the magistrate judge’s denial of leave to amend the Complaint, granting MSU’s Motion to Dismiss, and denying Montclair State University’s (MSU) cross-appeal as moot. Plaintiff filed suit against MSU alleging that she was wrongfully terminated from her position in violation of the federal Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and state antidiscrimination law. MSU moved to dismiss the Complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction on sovereign immunity grounds. The court dismissed MSU’s Motion, concluding that MSU is not the state's alter ego and is subject to suit. On appeal, the Third Circuit reversed and remanded, finding that MSU is in fact an arm of the state and therefore was entitled to sovereign immunity. On remand, Plaintiff moved for leave to amend her Complaint to add two University employees as defendants to the FMLA claim. The magistrate judge denied this Motion because the amendment did not relate back to the original Complaint, over which the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to the Third Circuit’s decision. The district court affirmed and added that because MSU is immune from suit under the FMLA and the state antidiscrimination law, it was required to dismiss the Complaint in its entirety.  

7/18/2017
read
Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA); Retaliation; Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity; Faculty & Staff; Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA); Retaliation; Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity; Disability Discrimination; Race and National Origin Discrimination

Vincent v. College of the Mainland (5th Cir. July 7, 2017)

Per curiam Opinion affirming the district court’s grant of the College of the Mainland’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff-Appellant sued the College after she was terminated from her position as a Computer Lab Assistant. She had taken leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) in 2008 and 2009, but continuing issues with tardiness and unexcused absences, along with her failure to comply with her supervisor’s directives or remedy her behavior, ultimately led to her termination. Plaintiff-Appellant alleged that she had been terminated due to her race, sex, and disability under Title VII and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and retaliated against under both statutes as well as the FMLA. Plaintiff-Appellant appealed the district court’s grant of summary judgment, claiming that it had erred in 1) adopting an improperly-narrow, “nearly identical” standard to dismiss her alleged comparator; and 2) insisting that plaintiffs can only bring discrimination claims for actions that constitute ultimate employment decisions, not merely “materially adverse” actions. The Fifth Circuit disagreed, holding instead that it was bound by Fifth Circuit precedent on both arguments. It further concluded that the magistrate judge properly dismissed Plaintiff-Appellant’s Title VII, ADA, and FMLA retaliation claims. 

7/10/2017
read
Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA); Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity; Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA); Disability Discrimination; Faculty & Staff; Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity

Trahanas v. Northwestern University (N.D. Ill. July 6, 2017)

Memorandum Opinion and Order granting in part and denying in part Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss. A former research technician at Northwestern who suffered from anxiety, depression, and ADHD claimed that her supervisor had denied her requested accommodation of reduced work hours. The supervisor then allegedly taunted Plaintiff for her disability and request for accommodations, disclosed Plaintiff’s disability to her coworkers, and failed to discipline those coworkers for mocking Plaintiff. Plaintiff eventually took leave under the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) for stress related to the alleged harassment. After she was later terminated, Plaintiff filed suit against Northwestern University and her former supervisor for alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Title VII, and the FMLA, along with various state law tort theories. The court dismissed all but Plaintiff’s Title VII hostile work environment/discrimination, ADA retaliation, FMLA retaliation, and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims.

7/10/2017
read
Retaliation; Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA); Faculty & Staff

Jennings v. University of North Carolina (N.C. App. July 5, 2017)

Unpublished Opinion affirming the trial court’s dismissal of Plaintiff’s Complaint. Elizabeth City State University, a constituent of the University of North Carolina, terminated Plaintiff for abusing her privileges as a network administrator during a disciplinary conference that took place while Plaintiff was on leave under the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) leave. Plaintiff filed suit claiming her supervisor—whom Plaintiff had previously reported for multiple breaches of a faculty computer—harassed and later terminated her in retaliation for exposing his misbehavior and in violation of the FMLA. The lower court dismissed the case, concluding that Plaintiff failed to allege that she had exhausted administrative remedies or that administrative remedies would have been futile. The appeals court affirmed.

7/7/2017
read
Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA); Retaliation; Retaliation; Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA); Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity

Padilla v. Yeshiva University (2d Cir. May 31, 2017)

Summary Order vacating and remanding the district court’s dismissal of Plaintiffs’ claims. Two former employees of Yeshiva University brought a retaliation claim against the University and their union under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and a disability discrimination claim based on alleged violations of state law. The district court dismissed their claims upon finding that Plaintiffs provided insufficient evidence to link their FMLA leave to their termination. The Second Circuit vacated the district court’s ruling, holding that at the pleading stage, the inconsistencies in the timing and sequence of events and the purported hostility on the part of Yeshiva were sufficient to support a plausible inference of retaliation. Plaintiffs’ disability discrimination claim was also reinstated and remanded. 

6/2/2017
read
Retaliation; Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA); Faculty & Staff; Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity

Liu v. Univ. of Miami Sch. of Medicine (11th Cir. May 19, 2017)

Per curiam Opinion affirming the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the University of Miami School of Medicine (UM). Appellant, an Asian female and Chinese native, was demoted from a tenure-track position and later terminated from her research-track position at the University due to poor performance. She filed suit against UM alleging race, national origin, and sex discrimination claims under Title VII and Section 1981, along with retaliation claims under the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA). The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that the district court correctly concluded that Appellant had failed to exhaust her administrative remedies under Title VII because she filed an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission charge well beyond the 365-day time limit. Additionally, although there is no similar exhaustion requirement for Section 1981, the court found that the University provided legitimate, non-discriminatory reasons for terminating Appellant, and that Appellant either admitted to her poor performance or failed to provide evidence of a potential discriminatory motive. Further, Appellant failed to make a prima facie showing of FMLA retaliation because she requested leave after UM issued her a written notice of termination.  

5/22/2017
read