In Dotson v. Pfizer, Inc., the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court’s finding that Dotson’s employer had interfered with his right to leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) and had engaged in retaliation. The court also reversed the district court’s denial of an award for pre-judgment interest. The court’s opinion can be found here. More after the break.
The district court found that the employer, Pfizer, Inc. (“Pfizer”), had interfered with Dotson’s right to leave under the FMLA, and that it retaliated against Dotson for exercising those rights. Dotson was awarded $1,876 on the interference claim and $331,429.25 on the retaliation claim. Dotson was also awarded $331,429.25 in liquidated damages, $375,000 in attorneys’ fees, and $14,264.88 in costs.
Although the parties did not dispute that Dotson had taken intermittent leave in preparation for an adoption, Pfizer argued that it had never approved intermittent FMLA leave. The Fourth Circuit rejected Pfizer’s argument, stating that the FMLA does not require an employee to “specifically invoke its protections in order to benefit from it.” The court interpreted the FMLA provision that requires agreement between the employer and employee before intermittent leave can be taken as giving employers the option to refuse intermittent leave requests. The court, however, found no evidence that Pfizer had refused to allow Dotson to take intermittent leave. In fact, the court found that Pfizer had agreed to the intermittent pre-adoption leave. The court also pointed to evidence that Pfizer had misled Dotson regarding his FMLA leave options, and stated that if that was indeed the case, Dotson “could not have come to an agreement on a more formal intermittent leave schedule.”
With regard to Dotson’s retaliation claim, the court emphasized that the FMLA prohibits employers from unlawfully interfering with employees’ rights to leave. Although termination is not specifically listed as a forbidden employer practice, the regulations prohibit the use of FMLA leave as a factor in making employment decisions. The court stated that Dotson had given “adequate notice” of his need to take leave, and Pfizer had the responsibility to determine whether the leave requested fell under the FMLA. The court found ample evidence from which the jury could conclude that Dotson had met the notice requirement and that Pfizer failed to meet its burden. The court also found evidence from which the jury could reasonably conclude that Pfizer’s stated reason behind its decision to terminate Dotson – namely, that Dotson’s donation of sample medication to an orphanage was in violation of company policy – was mere pretext for discrimination. In support of this contention, the court pointed to the fact that other Pfizer employees who were aware of Dotson’s intent to donate the medication did nothing to stop him. The court also made a note that on cross-examination, a Pfizer executive had conveyed dissatisfaction with a missed deadline due to one of Dotson’s pre-adoption trips. Finally, the court emphasized the fact that Dotson was the only one out of the five employees who were involved in the alleged mishandling of medication to have been terminated.
Turning to the question of damages, the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of front pay, which the district court had deemed as “too speculative.” With regard to the issue of pre-judgment interest, however, the court reversed the district court’s denial of the award, stating that pre-judgment interest under the FMLA is “mandatory rather than discretionary.” On the issue of attorneys’ fees, the court held that the district court’s award of $375,000 was not “clearly wrong.” The court noted that the district court had already reduced the award from the initial request of $550,000 based on Dotson’s only-partial victory. Nevertheless, the court vacated the fee award for recalculation based on Dotson’s right to pre-judgment interest, which would result in a fuller recovery on his claims.
Contributed by Claudia L. Guzman
Tags: 4th Circuit, FMLA
[...] The Laconic Law Blog » Blog Archive » 4th Circuit Affirms FMLA … By admin Pfizer, Inc., the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court’s finding that Dotson’s employer had interfered with his right to leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (”FMLA”) and had engaged in retaliation. … The Laconic Law Blog – http://welterlaw.com/blog/ [...]