Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Case Number: 2:21-CV-1013
Judge: Nora Barry Fischer
Court: United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania (Allegheny County)
Defendant's Attorney: Brian D. Lipkin, Catherine S. Loeffler, Craig M. Brooks
Description: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania civil rights lawyer represented Plaintiff who sued Defendant on a Family Medical Leave Act violation theory.
29 U.S.C. 2601 provides:
Congress finds that—
(1) the number of single-parent households and two-parent households in which the single parent or both parents work is increasing significantly;
(2) it is important for the development of children and the family unit that fathers and mothers be able to participate in early childrearing and the care of family members who have serious health conditions;
(3) the lack of employment policies to accommodate working parents can force individuals to choose between job security and parenting;
(4) there is inadequate job security for employees who have serious health conditions that prevent them from working for temporary periods;
(5) due to the nature of the roles of men and women in our society, the primary responsibility for family caretaking often falls on women, and such responsibility affects the working lives of women more than it affects the working lives of men; and
(6) employment standards that apply to one gender only have serious potential for encouraging employers to discriminate against employees and applicants for employment who are of that gender.
It is the purpose of this Act—
(1) to balance the demands of the workplace with the needs of families, to promote the stability and economic security of families, and to promote national interests in preserving family integrity;
(2) to entitle employees to take reasonable leave for medical reasons, for the birth or adoption of a child, and for the care of a child, spouse, or parent who has a serious health condition;
(3) to accomplish the purposes described in paragraphs (1) and (2) in a manner that accommodates the legitimate interests of employers;
(4) to accomplish the purposes described in paragraphs (1) and (2) in a manner that, consistent with the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, minimizes the potential for employment discrimination on the basis of sex by ensuring generally that leave is available for eligible medical reasons (including maternity-related disability) and for compelling family reasons, on a gender-neutral basis; and
(5) to promote the goal of equal employment opportunity for women and men, pursuant to such clause.
Outcome: 04/12/2023 63 ORDER terminating 32 Motion for Summary Judgment and 52 Motion for Leave to File Supplemental Brief on Pending Summary Judgment Motion by GREAT ARROW BUILDERS, LLC (see 62 ). Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 4/12/2023. Text-only entry; no PDF document will issue. This text-only entry constitutes the Order of the Court or Notice on the matter. (bdk) (Entered: 04/12/2023)
04/12/2023 64 ORDER FOR ADMINISTRATIVE CLOSING. The Court having been advised the above-captioned case has been resolved, the Clerk shall mark case closed; that nothing contained in this Order shall be considered a dismissal or disposition of this action, and, that should further proceedings therein become necessary or desirable, either party may initiate them in the same manner as if this Order had not been entered; per the minute entry at Docket No. 62 , U.S. Magistrate Judge Maureen P. Kelly expressly retains jurisdiction in this matter to consider any issue arising during the period when settlement is being finalized, including, but not limi