Case Scenario: NOVAK V. METROHEALTH MEDICAL CENTER 503 F.3d 572 (6th Cir. 2007)

Facts: Donna Novak was employed by MetroHealth Medical Center. MetroHealth maintained a "point-based" attendance policy that assigned points to employees based on the number of hours of unexcused absence. Employees were terminated if they accumulated 112 points during a twelve-month period (leave authorized under the FMLA was not included in the point total). Novak was absent from work a number of times in late March 2004. She called MetroHealth each day that she was absent to provide an explanation. Some absences were because she was experiencing back pain; others were because she was helping care for her eighteen-year-old daughter, Victoria, who had recently given birth. She said that her daughter was suffering from "postpartum depression"and that she had to help her care for the baby (Novak's grandson). Novak's absences resulted in her accumulating more than 112 points, and she faced termination. She requested that MetroHealth grant her leave under the FMLA. Novak consulted a Dr. Patil about her back pain, but she had been treated by a Dr. Wloszek in the past. MetroHealth required Novak to submit a FMLA certification form that was to be completed by the physician of record, Dr. Wloszek, and not by Dr. Patil. Dr. Wloszek completed the form, but because she had not examined Novak since October 2003, Dr. Wloszek omitted information on the description of the medical facts and the likely duration of Novak's condition. Novak then asked Boda, Wloszek's assistant, to complete the remainder of the form and fax it to MetroHealth. MetroHealth questioned the authenticity of Dr. Wloszek's certification forms, and contacted Dr. Wloszek, who told them that she completed the form based on secondhand information from Novak about her condition. Novak also submitted certification forms for her absences to help her daughter care for the baby. On April 16, 2004, MetroHealth determined that Novak's March absences did not qualify for the FMLA leave. Her absences were not authorized and, as a result, MetroHealth terminated her employment. Novak filed suit against MetroHealth, alleging interference with her FMLA rights and retaliation under the FMLA. The trial court held that there was no basis for the FMLA claims, and dismissed them with prejudice. Novak appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.

Issue: Was Novak entitled to FMLA leave because of her back pain and/or her caring for her daughter and her grandson?

Decision: An employer may require an employee requesting FMLA leave to provide a doctor's certification confirming the existence of a serious health condition. A doctor's certification of a serious health condition is sufficient if it states:

• the date on which the serious health condition began;

• the probable duration of the condition;

• the appropriate medical facts within the health care provider's knowledge; and

• a statement that the employee is unable to perform her job duties. An employer may show that the certification is invalid or inauthentic.

The court of appeals agreed that Novak's certification forms from Dr. Wloszek were insufficient to establish the existence of a serious health condition for purposes of the FMLA. MetroHealth had established that the certification was unreliable and it acted reasonably in refusing to grant FMLA leave on that basis. Novak also claimed that she was entitled to FMLA leave to care for her daughter, who was suffering from short-term postpartum depression. The FMLA permits an employee to take leave to care for a parent, spouse, or child suffering from a serious health condition. However, the FMLA authorizes leave to care for a child eighteen years of age or older only if that child is"disabled" within the definition of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Because Novak did not establish that her adult daughter suffered from a disability, the FMLA did not authorize Novak's leave to care for her. Novak offered evidence about her daughter's difficulty in caring for the baby and Novak's need to help with the care of her grandchild. But the FMLA does not entitle an employee to take leave to care for a grandchild, only for a parent, spouse, or child. The court of appeals held that Novak was not entitled to FMLA leave. The court therefore affirmed the dismissal of Novak's FMLA claims.