Category Archives: Family and Medical Leave Act

The blog has repeatedly commented on the surge in FMLA lawsuits. Here’s another one, this time the employer is Nova Southeastern University. The complaint also alleges a violation of the pregnancy discrimination act. In short, the plaintiff claims she was approved for FMLA leave for childbirth, but that several months before the leave, she was terminated. She also claims that part of the motivation was to minimize the employer’s employee benefits costs.
The blog isn’t involved in this lawsuit but it makes the following observations anyway:
First — the FMLA allegations are vague. A motion to dismiss or least a motion for a more definite statement is in order. At the time the employee was terminated, she had not yet become eligible for FMLA leave. Since she was not a covered, eligible employee, at the time of her termination, it is hard to argue that her FMLA rights were violated. One must have a right before one can enforce it. (In fairness, there is conflicting law about this — firing an employee the day before she becomes eligible for FMLA leave because the employer does not want her to take FMLA leave is clearly improper).
Second — the pregnancy discrimination claims are probably stronger and cleaner than the FMLA claims. Plus, you could file suit in state court and avoid a more hostile federal forum.
The complaint is here:
Celluci v. Nova Southeastern FMLA
The blog does not know who is representing Nova Southeastern. Sarelson Law Firm has experience representing parties in FMLA lawsuits.

The blog has been fascinated by two recent trends — a surge in lawsuits brought pursuant to the Family & Medical Leave Act and a surge in employment lawsuits filed against law firms. Now, they converge. A former male associate lawyer at Dechert in Boston accuses the firm of violating his FMLA rights in part because of the firm’s macho culture. Most plaintiffs in FMLA lawsuits are women, and the male plaintiffs tend to bring suits for their own medical conditions. Men are not supposed to take time off work to be a caregiver — at least that’s what the suit alleges is the mentality at Dechert. Not sure who Dechert retained or whether they will handle this in-house.
The Complaint is here:
FMLA Lawsuit Dechert

The blog has previously covered what it perceives to be as a strong uptick in Family & Medical Leave Act cases. The FMLA is a super-complicated federal law that provides up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave for certain employees for the employee’s own medical condition, for the birth of a child or to care for a sick member of the employee’s immediate family. The implementing regulations are even more complicated than the statute.
Here’s a recent FMLA lawsuit against Cintas Corporation pending before Judge Seitz. The plaintiff alleges that he was denied FMLA leave because the company was too understaffed and because it was a sign that he was not committed to the job. (None of these are lawful grounds to deny someone FMLA leave). Cintas gave the plaintiff’s job to someone else at the company, and requested that he resign. Perhaps the employer was skeptical because the employee’s basis for the FMLA leave was to care for his sick father in Haiti. The blog is betting that an EEOC charge is also pending based upon the plaintiff’s national origin. If the plaintiff’s allegations are true, then Cintas is going to have a very hard time dealing with this suit. No word on who Cintas hired for the defense.
The Complaint is here:
Cintas FMLA Lawsuit