Braden v. Optum RX, Inc.

D. Kan.November 15, 2021No. 2:21-cv-02046

Defendant WinUnitedHealth Group (Optum RX, Inc., Optum Services, Inc., UnitedHealthCare Services, Inc.)

Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute: Labor: Family and Medical Leave Act
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling: Unknown
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached: motion to dismiss
State: Kansas
Circuit: Tenth Circuit

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Wrongful TerminationFailure to Accommodate

Outcome

The court granted the employer's motion to compel arbitration of the plaintiff's FMLA and ADA claims, finding a valid arbitration agreement and delegation provision requiring the arbitrator to decide arbitrability questions. The suit was stayed pending arbitration.

Browse more:Wrongful Termination cases Failure to Accommodate cases

Similar Rulings

Con Ed v. NLRB

U.S. Supreme CourtDec 1938

Mixed Result

Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board

U.S. Supreme CourtFeb 1951

Remanded

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. St. Francis Xavier Parochial School and St. Francis Xavier Church

D.C. CircuitJul 1997

Remanded

Republic Aviation Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board

U.S. Supreme CourtApr 1945

Plaintiff Win

Shelley Savage v. Glendale Union High School, District No. 205, Maricopa County

9th CircuitSep 2003

Plaintiff Win

Read Full Opinion More UnitedHealth Group (Optum RX, Inc., Optum Services, Inc., UnitedHealthCare Services, Inc.) Rulings All Rulings

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 3 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

Check My Rights Learn the Basics

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.