Johnson v. Dollar General, 060613 FED8, 12-3033

Docket Nº:12-3033
Opinion Judge:PER CURIAM.
Party Name:Todd Johnson Plaintiff- Appellant v. Dollar General; Dolgencorp, LLC; Michael Williams Defendants-Appellees
Judge Panel:Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.
Case Date:June 06, 2013
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Todd Johnson Plaintiff- Appellant

v.

Dollar General; Dolgencorp, LLC; Michael Williams Defendants-Appellees

No. 12-3033

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit

June 6, 2013

Unpublished

Submitted: June 6, 2013

Appeal from United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa - Ft. Dodge

Before WOLLMAN, BOWMAN, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Todd Johnson appeals district court's1 adverse grant of summary judgment in this action against his former employer claiming violations of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and state law. Following de novo review, we agree with the district court's determination that Johnson did not create a genuine issue of material fact that he had a "serious heath condition" for purposes of a claim that defendants interfered with his FMLA rights. See 29 U.S.C. § 2611(11) (defining "serious health condition"); Ballato v. Comcast Corp., 676 F.3d 768, 772 (8th Cir. 2012) (initial burden of proof in FMLA interference case is on employee to show that he was entitled to benefit denied); Rankin v. Seagate Tech., Inc., 246 F.3d 1145, 1147 (8th Cir. 2001) (conditions like common cold or flu will not routinely satisfy requirements). We also agree that Johnson's FMLA retaliation claim fails because, among other reasons, he did not establish he was attempting to invoke FMLA rights. See Wierman v. Casey's General Stores, 638 F.3d 984, 999 (8th Cir. 2011) (FMLA retaliation claim is evaluated under burden-shifting framework; to establish prima facie case, employee must show that (1) he engaged in protected conduct, (2) he...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP