M ORE L AW
LEXAPEDIA
Home
Verdicts
and
Decisions
Search Database
Recent Cases
Cases By Subject
Report A Case
Lawyers
Search Directory
By State & City
Recent Additions
Add A
Lawyer Listing
Court
Reporters
Recent Listings
Search
By States & City
Add A Basic
Reporter Listing
Expert
Witnesses
Recent Listings
Search Directory
By State & Expertise
Add A Basic
Expert Witness
Listing
MoreLaw
Store
The Store
Recent Listings
(Search)
Add A Basic
Classified Ad
Links
County Seats
State Links
National Links
International Pages
Information
MoreLaw Marketing
Contact MoreLaw


Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Date: 08-29-2001

Case Style: James Roley v. The Nordam Group, Inc.

Case Number: 00-CV-0699-H

Judge: Sven E. Holmes

Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma

Plaintiff's Attorney: D.E. "Ned" Dismukes, Tulsa, Oklahoma

Defendant's Attorney: Stephen L. Andrew, Dr. Kevin Ikenberry and Renee Williams of Stephen L. Andrew & Associates, Tulsa, Oklahoma

Description: Plaintiff alleged that he was employed by Nordam Group, Inc. in Tulsa in 1999 when he went to the hospital with what was diagnosed as pneumonia. Plaintiff alleged that he was admitted to he hospital on August 8, 199, and discharged on August 12, 1999. Plaintiff was scheduled to work the week of August 9 - 13, 199, but did not report to work. Plaintiff returned to work on August 16, 1999, but was fired. Plaintiff claimed that his firing was a violation of the Family and Medical Leave Act, 29 U.S.C. sec. 2601, et al. ("FMLA"), in that he was hospitalized with a serious health condition, he gave adequate notice of his need for leave, but was fired for taking leave. Plaintiff dismissed with prejudice his implied contract claim based on Defendant's Attendance Policy.

Defendant denied that it violated the FMLA. It alleged that it discharge the Plaintiff for violating its three-day, no-call rule. Defendant asserted that the parties reached an accord and satisfaction that the case was settled by the parties when the plaintiff accepted defendant's offer of reinstatement and the payment of $750.00. (Defendant's defense was converted to implied release and satisfaction in the jury charge.)

Outcome: Plaintiff's verdict for $25,691.12.

Plaintiff's Experts: Unknown

Defendant's Experts: Unknown

Comments: Plaintiff will probably be entitled to liquidated damages equal to the amount of the verdict, interest, attorney fees and costs.



 
Home | Add Verdict | Add Expert | Add Court Reporter | Articles
Find-A-Lawyer By City | Find-A-Lawyer By State and City
Verdict Corrections | Link Errors | Advertising | Editor | Privacy Statement
© 1996-2009 MoreLaw.com, Inc.
MoreLaw Marketing
MoreLaw Marketing
Free Marketing

For Lawyers, Forensic Experts, Court Reporters and Other Businesses
Advertise on this site