FILTERS



Find by DATE
Reset

Latest Cases & Developments


  • Date:

    Hansen v. The Lutheran Univ. Ass’n. (N.D. Ind. Mar. 19, 2026)

    Opinion and Order Granting Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff, the former Assistant Director of Building Services at Valparaiso University, sued the university alleging violation of the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) after his position was eliminated while he was on medical leave. The court granted summary judgment for the university, finding the university had presented unrebutted evidence that it had eliminated plaintiff’s position as part of a “planned restructuring” prior to his request for FMLA leave while noting plaintiff failed to provide evidence this rationale was pretextual. In reaching its decision, the court explained that the FMLA does not guarantee reinstatement when an employee would have been terminated regardless of leave and cautioned that suspicious timing alone is insufficient to establish retaliation.

    Topics:

    Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Faculty & Staff | Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) | Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) | Privacy & Transparency | Retaliation

  • Date:

    Turner v. Bd. of Supervisors of the Univ. of La. Sys. (5th Cir. Aug. 9, 2023)

    Opinion affirming summary judgment in favor of the University.  Plaintiff, a former tenured English professor at Nicholls State University, brought a federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) interference claim and state-law disability discrimination and retaliation claims against the University and multiple officials, alleging that following her diagnosis with irritable bowel syndrome and approval for intermittent FMLA leave, the University nevertheless required her to submit doctor’s notes for each absence and reassigned her to the Writing Lab allegedly as a way to force her to retire.  In affirming summary judgment in favor of the University, the Fifth Circuit found that her interference claim failed because the University had required the documentation only for plaintiff to collect paid sick leave for her otherwise unpaid FMLA leave.  Her retaliation claim failed because she had not identified any protected activity in her opening brief, and her discrimination claim failed because she admitted that her request to teach all of her classes online would have required the University to reassign adjunct professors already scheduled to teach the classes. 

    Topics:

    Disability Discrimination | Discrimination, Accommodation, & Diversity | Faculty & Staff | Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) | Retaliation