Barker v. St. Mary's Regional Medical Center, 7382

Decision Date02 August 1995
Docket NumberDocket No. A,No. 7382,7382
Citation663 A.2d 44
Parties7 NDLR P 16 Denise BARKER v. ST. MARY'S REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER. DecisionLawnd-94-708.
CourtMaine Supreme Court

Anthony K. Ferguson, Fales & Fales, P.A., Lewiston, for plaintiff.

Joanne I. Simonelli, Isaacson & Raymond, Lewiston, for defendant.

Before ROBERTS, GLASSMAN, CLIFFORD, RUDMAN, DANA, and LIPEZ, JJ.

LIPEZ, Justice.

Denise Barker appeals from a judgment entered in the Superior Court (Androscoggin County, Alexander, J.) in favor of St. Mary's Regional Medical Center after a non-jury trial on Barker's claims for violation of the Family Medical Leave Act, 26 M.R.S.A. §§ 843-848 (1988 & Supp.1994) [hereinafter "Act"], and the Maine Human Rights Act, 5 M.R.S.A. §§ 4551-4631 (1989 & Supp.1994). We affirm the judgment.

Background

Denise Barker is a licensed practical nurse [hereinafter "LPN"] who has had diabetes since childhood. She began working for St. Mary's Regional Medical Center as an LPN in 1978. In December of 1989, Barker learned that she was pregnant. Because of complications related to her diabetes, she took a medical leave of absence from her LPN position in the C-3 unit at St. Mary's for the duration of the pregnancy.

On September 20, 1990, Barker met with Jacqueline Brayton, the Director of Human Resources for St. Mary's, and informed her that she could begin work again on October 15, 1990. Brayton told Barker that her old position had been upgraded to require a registered nurse [hereinafter "RN"] and had been filled on June 11, 1990. She offered Barker 3 employment opportunities: an LPN position on the C-2 unit, an LPN position at d'Youville Pavilion, the nursing home across the street which is affiliated with St. Mary's, or an on-call position with St. Mary's. Barker elected to take the on-call position and completed a change of status form to that effect on the same day she spoke with Brayton.

Without terminating her status as an employee of St. Mary's, Barker subsequently accepted positions with several other employers. Although full-time LPN positions have become available at d'Youville Pavilion, no such positions have arisen at the hospital. Barker rejected an offer to work full-time as an LPN at the nursing home.

Barker filed the instant complaint alleging a breach of contract and violations of the Family Leave and Maine Human Rights Acts against St. Mary's. The court granted St. Mary's motion for a summary judgment on the breach of contract count. After a non-jury trial on the remaining claims, the court found in favor of the hospital. Barker moved to amend the findings, to make additional findings and to alter or amend the judgment. The court denied the motion. This appeal followed.

Discussion

The Family Medical Leave Act provides that:

Any employee who exercises the right to family medical leave under this subchapter, upon expiration of the leave, is entitled to be restored by the employer to the position held by the employee when the leave commenced or to a position with equivalent seniority status, employee benefits, pay and other terms and conditions of employment.

26 M.R.S.A. § 845(1). This subsection of the Act further states:

This subsection does not apply if the employer proves that the employee was not restored as provided in this subsection because of conditions unrelated to the employee's exercise of rights under this subchapter.

Id. An employer does not violate the Act if the employer can prove such conditions unrelated to the employee's exercise of rights under the Act.

We will not set aside the factual findings of the trial court unles...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • VanVoorhees v. Dodge
    • United States
    • Maine Supreme Court
    • July 11, 1996
    ...(Me.1991). We will not set aside the factual findings of the trial court unless they are clearly erroneous. Barker v. St. Mary's Regional Medical Ctr., 663 A.2d 44, 46 (Me.1995). A trial court's factual finding is "clearly erroneous" if there is no competent evidence in the record to suppor......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT