Search form

FMLA Requires Three Full Days of Incapacity for "Serious Health Condition," Appeals Court Rules

By Francis P. Alvarez
  • October 27, 2003

A hospital employee could not claim that several intermittent and partial day absences caused by a workplace injury amounted to a period of incapacity constituting a "serious health condition" under the Family and Medical Leave Act. Federal Department of Labor regulations require an employee be incapacitated for three full consecutive days before the employee's "serious health condition" invokes the protection of the FMLA leave. According to the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, the FMLA's definition of "serious health condition" requires either inpatient care or "continuing treatment by a health care provider," which DOL regulation clearly states must include a period of incapacity of more than three consecutive calendar days.

At issue was the hospital's actions in terminating the employee for excessive absenteeism. Prior to an injury she sustained while at work, the employee had received a three-day suspension and a warning for attendance problems. The injury resulted in her intermittent absence from work over a 10-day period to attend doctor's appointments. She also left work early on a few occasions and did not report for work nor call in at least twice.

After being discharged, the employee sued the hospital claiming she was entitled to a period of protected leave for a serious health condition under the FMLA. At trial, the jury requested and received information from the judge that the law required "three consecutive calendar days, 72 hours or more" to qualify the period of incapacity as a "serious health condition." The jury returned a verdict for the hospital, and the employee filed this appeal.

Although the employee contended she had established that she was incapacitated for seven consecutive partial days and had met the FMLA's regulatory requirements, she did not claim that she suffered an incapacity lasting three or more full days. In rejecting her argument, the court said the plain language of the regulation defined the period of incapacity as more than three consecutive calendar days. Using the "universally understood" meaning of "calendar day" as a "whole day, not part of a day," the court reasoned that partial days do not meet the regulation's requirement. Moreover, the period of incapacity must be some increment longer than three consecutive whole days, the court noted in concluding that the bright line interpretation "will ensure that 'serious health conditions' are in fact serious, and are ones that result in an extended period of incapacity, as Congress intended." [Russell v. North Broward Hosp., 11th Cir., 10/2/03.]

Jackson Lewis attorneys in the Disability Management Practice Group are available to assist employers with their FMLA, ADA and other compliance obligations.

©2003 Jackson Lewis P.C. This material is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice nor does it create a client-lawyer relationship between Jackson Lewis and any recipient. Recipients should consult with counsel before taking any actions based on the information contained within this material. This material may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Reproduction of this material in whole or in part is prohibited without the express prior written consent of Jackson Lewis P.C., a law firm that built its reputation on providing workplace law representation to management. Founded in 1958, the firm has grown to more than 900 attorneys in major cities nationwide serving clients across a wide range of practices and industries including government relations, healthcare and sports law. More information about Jackson Lewis can be found at www.jacksonlewis.com.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

May 24, 2019

Oregon Enacts Pregnancy Accommodations Law

May 24, 2019

Beginning January 1, 2020, Oregon employers must provide reasonable accommodations to employees and job applicants who have limitations related to pregnancy, unless doing so would impose an undue hardship. The new law applies to employers with at least six employees. The Employer Accommodation for Pregnancy Act amends Oregon’s civil... Read More

May 21, 2019

Non-Minneapolis Employers Must Comply With Minneapolis Paid Sick Leave Law, Appeals Court Rules

May 21, 2019

Minneapolis’ Sick and Safe Ordinance extends to any employee who performs at least 80 hours of work per benefit year in the City of Minneapolis, even if his or her employer is not located within the city’s limits, the Minnesota Court of Appeals has held. Minnesota Chamber of Commerce v. Minneapolis, No. A18-0771 (Apr. 29, 2019). This... Read More

May 15, 2019

EPLI Trends, Sexual Harassment Claims, and Planning for 2019

May 15, 2019

As workplace laws continue to evolve, the potential risk exposure is increasing. Jackson Lewis prepared this trends overview to help assess the current workplace law landscape in the #MeToo era and the wave of agency charges, latest claims, and new laws.  Highlights include: Pay Equity Lawsuits: The Next Wave of Litigation... Read More