Skip to main content

Joseph R. Scamihorn, Jr. v. General Truck Drivers, Office, Food and Warehouse Union, Local 952 Albertson's, Inc.

9th CircuitMarch 4, 2002No. 00-55722Cited 31 times

Case Details

Judge(s)
Browning, Fernandez, Fisher
Status
Published
Procedural Posture
appeal
Circuit
9th Circuit

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Failure to Accommodate

Outcome

The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court's grant of summary judgment for Albertson's, finding that Scamihorn presented sufficient evidence of triable issues of fact regarding whether his circumstances qualified for FMLA protection, and remanded the case for trial on the merits.

What This Ruling Means

**Worker Wins Right to Trial in Family Leave Case** Joseph Scamihorn, a worker at Albertson's grocery store, sued his employer and union after claiming he was denied proper family and medical leave. Scamihorn argued that Albertson's failed to accommodate his need for time off under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), which gives eligible workers the right to unpaid leave for serious health conditions or family emergencies. Initially, a lower court sided with Albertson's without allowing a full trial, dismissing Scamihorn's case entirely. However, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed with this decision. The appeals court found that Scamihorn had presented enough evidence to raise legitimate questions about whether his situation qualified for FMLA protection. As a result, they reversed the lower court's ruling and sent the case back for a proper trial. This decision matters for workers because it shows that courts will carefully examine FMLA cases rather than quickly dismissing them. Workers who believe their employer wrongfully denied them family or medical leave shouldn't give up if they lose initially – they may have valid claims that deserve a full hearing in court.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Similar Rulings

Booth
E.D. Mich.Mar 2020
Defendant Win
Albertson's, Inc. v. Employment Security Department
Wash. Ct. App.May 2000
Plaintiff Win
Albertson's, Inc. v. Employment Security Department
Wash. Ct. App.May 2000
Unresolvable
People in re S.L. and A.L
COLOCTAPPDec 2017

The Rio Blanco County Department of Human Services (Department) became involved with the parents in this case as a result of concerns about the children's welfare due to the condition of the family home, the parents' use of methamphetamine, and criminal cases involving the parents. Attempts at voluntary services failed, and on the Department's petition for dependency and neglect, the district court ultimately terminated the parents' rights. On appeal, the parents contended that the Department failed to make reasonable efforts to reunify them with their children. Specifically, the parents contended that the Department did not give them sufficient time to complete the services under their treatment plans and failed to accommodate their drug testing needs. The termination hearing was not held until more than a year after the motion to terminate was filed. For nine months before the motion to terminate was filed, the Department provided numerous services to the parents, including substance abuse therapy, therapeutic visitation supervision, drug abuse monitoring, and a parental capacity evaluation. The Department also provided counseling for the children. Both parents missed drug tests and tested positive during the testing period, and both were arrested for possession of methamphetamine during the pendency of the case. The Department made reasonable accommodations to meet the parents' needs and the parents had sufficient time to comply with their treatment plans. The record supports the trial court's findings that termination was appropriate because (1) the court-approved appropriate treatment plan had not been complied with by the parents or had not been successful in rehabilitating them (2) the parents were unfit and (3) the conduct or condition of the parents was unlikely to change within a reasonable time. Father also contended that the trial court's decision to interview the 9-year-old twin children together in chambers fundamentally and seriously affected the basi

Defendant Win
Shelley Savage v. Glendale Union High School, District No. 205, Maricopa County
9th CircuitSep 2003
Plaintiff Win

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.