596 F. Supp. 2d 324 - Basso v. Potter’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district ·

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(a) For purposes of FMLA, serious health condition entitling an employee to FMLA leave means an illness, injury, impairment or physical or mental condition that involves inpatient care as defined in § 825.114 or continuing treatment by a health care provider as defined in § 825.115. (b) The term incapacity means inability to work, attend school or perform other regular daily activities due to the serious health condition, treatment therefore, or recovery therefrom. (c) The term treatment includes (but is not limited to) examinations to determine if a serious health condition exists and evaluations of the condition. Treatment does not include routine physical examinations, eye examinations, or dental examinations. A regimen of continuing treatment includes, for example, a course of prescription medication (e.g., an antibiotic) or therapy requiring special equipment to resolve or alleviate the health condition (e.g., oxygen). A regimen of continuing treatment that includes the taking of over-the-counter medications such as aspirin, antihistamines, or salves; or bed-rest, drinking fluids, exercise, and other similar activities that can be initiated without a visit to a health care provider, is not, by itself, sufficient to constitute a regimen of continuing treatment for purposes of FMLA leave.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Dighello v. Thurston Foods, Inc.

2. “The FMLA does not require an employer to be “clairvoyant.” [Brown v. The Pension Bds., United Church of Christ, 488 F.Supp.2d 395, 409 (S.D.N.Y.2007) ]. Thus, if the employee fails to provide its employer with the required notice, “the employer can deny leave even if the employee has a serious health condition.” Phillips v. Quebecor World RAI, Inc., 450 F.3d 308, 311 (7th Cir.2006); see also 29 C.F.R. § 825.208 (a)(1) (“An employee giving notice of the need for unpaid FMLA leave must explain the reasons for the needed leave so as to allow the employer to determine that the leave qualifies under the Act. If the employee fails to explain the reasons, leave may be denied.”).... [T]he “FMLA does not require employers to play Sherlock Holmes, scanning an employee’s work history for clues as to the undisclosed, true reason for an employee’s absence.” See de la Rama v. Illinois Dep’t of Human Servs., 541 F.3d 681, 687 (7th Cir.2008)....”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 634 F. Supp. 2d 688 - Crown v. Nissan North American, Inc.

3. “[B]ecause FMLA leave applies only to a 'serious health condition' or 'chronic serious health condition' as defined under 29 C.F.R. § 825.114 , an employee's reference to being sick 'does not suggest to the employer that the medical condition might be serious or that the FMLA otherwise could be applicable.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Dighello v. Thurston Foods, Inc.