Adult Child's Short-Termed Restriction On Major Life Activity Did Not Constitute Disability Under FMLA
Novak sued the employer for violation of the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and state law alleging entitlement to FMLA leave because of a back injury and to care for an adult child suffering from postpartum depression. The trial court granted the employer's motion for summary judgment. The 6th Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part.
One issue on appeal was whether temporary non-chronic impairments of short duration were disabilities. The 1st Circuit, in Navarro v. Pfizer Corp., 261 F3d 90 (2001), declared that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's interpretive guidance (29 CFR Pt 1630, App Section 1630.2(j)) for the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) could not be applied to the FMLA because it clashed with the underlying purposes of that statute. The court determined that short-termed restriction on a major life activity of an adult child did not constitute a disability under the FMLA. One concurring opinion adopted the Navarro standard, and the other did not express an opinion on the standard to be adopted.
Novak v. MetroHealth
The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals’ jurisdiction includes Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee.
This abstract was provided by LawMemo.Com, publisher of the popular Employment Law Memo email service. Editor Ross Runkel can be reached at Ross@LawMemo.Com or 1-877-399-8028.