United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Eastern Division
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
MATTHEW F. KENNELLY, DISTRICT JUDGE
Juanda
Lynn Jordan has sued her former employer, Marsh USA, Inc.,
for interfering with her exercise of rights under the Family
and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and terminating her in
retaliation for exercising her FMLA rights. Marsh has moved
for summary judgment on Jordan's claims. For the reasons
stated below, the Court denies Marsh's motion.
Background
The
following facts are undisputed except where otherwise
indicated. Marsh is an insurance brokering and risk
management company. Jordan worked for Marsh as an insurance
specialist. On August 15, 2017, Jordan's physician, Dr.
Sachin Dixit, diagnosed her with anxiety, stress, and
hypertension. That day, Jordan sent a text message and phoned
her supervisor at Marsh to inform him that she would need to
miss work until August 28, 2017 for medical reasons.
The
Leave Management team of Marsh's parent company
administers leaves of absence for Marsh's employees.
Leave Management works with a third-party administrator, The
Hartford, on the leave process. The Hartford reviews and
approves leaves of absence on behalf of Marsh. Leave
Management is responsible for notifying Marsh's employees
about The Hartford's decisions.
On
August 16, 2017, Leave Management sent Jordan a letter with
information about the company's benefits and how to
access them. The letter discussed the availability of FMLA
leave and the procedures for obtaining it. After receiving
the letter, Jordan understood that the company's policy
required her to submit a certification from her physician
regarding her medical leave.
At a
medical appointment on August 28, 2017, Jordan learned from
her doctor that she would need to continue to stay out on
leave. She testified during her deposition that she contacted
her supervisor and Leave Management, which advised that it
would send her documentation for her doctor to complete.
Leave Management also told her to check in with her
supervisor weekly, which Jordan did.
Leave
Management provided Jordan with a certification form, which
Dr. Dixit completed and signed on August 28,
2017.[1] On the form, Dr. Dixit indicated that
Jordan would be incapacitated for a single, continuous period
due to her medical condition. Part of the fifth question
asked him to "estimate the beginning and ending dates
for the periods of [the employee's] incapacity." Ex.
2 to Pl.'s Stat. of Add'l Facts, dkt. no. 61-1, at
44. In response, Dr. Dixit listed the dates of August 15,
2017 to September 30, 2017.
At The
Hartford's request, Dr. Dixit also completed attending
physician statements relating to Jordan's medical
conditions and her need for continuous leave. The parties
dispute, and it is unclear from the record, whether Jordan or
a member of Dr. Dixit's staff submitted these statements
to The Hartford, how that person submitted them, and when The
Hartford received them.[2] On August 16, 2017, Dr. Dixit completed
an attending physician statement in which he indicated that
Jordan's expected "[r]eturn to [w]ork" date was
October 1, 2017. Id. at 48. On September 25, 2017,
Dr. Dixit completed another attending physician statement in
which he indicated that her expected return date was
"unknown." Id. at 53.
On
September 29, 2017, The Hartford sent Jordan a letter stating
that it had not received "necessary medical
information" from Jordan's doctor and thus was
"unable to completely evaluate" her claim for
benefits. Ex. 3 to Def.'s Stat. of Undisputed Material
Facts (SUMF), dkt. no. 46-1, at 108. As a result, the letter
indicated, The Hartford had closed Jordan's file. The
letter did not state whether The Hartford had received any
medical documentation relating to Jordan's leave or, if
it had received documentation, what more it needed. On
several occasions before sending the September 29 letter, The
Hartford had orally advised Jordan either that it was missing
her medical records (as Jordan contends) or that it needed
additional medical records (as Marsh contends).
In
September and October, Jordan called The Hartford and Leave
Management multiple times to discuss the status of her leave.
On a call to Leave Management on September 26, 2017, she
stated that she expected to need leave until at least October
9, 2017. Jordan spoke to Leave Management about her need for
leave as late as October 30, 2017; she testified that an
employee of Leave Management told her that day that she had
not received a paycheck because she was on FMLA leave. Marsh
does not dispute that Jordan spoke to someone from Leave
Management that day but contends that no one from Leave
Management told Jordan she was approved for FMLA leave
extending through October.
The
parties also dispute whether Jordan or her doctor submitted
all necessary documentation to The Hartford and/or Leave
Management. The parties agree that Leave Management and The
Hartford repeatedly told Jordan that The Hartford was missing
some required documentation, but it is unclear from the
record what documentation it was missing. Jordan contends
that she tried to provide the documentation needed to support
her FMLA leave. She testified that went to Dr. Dixit's
office more than fifteen times to inform him that Leave
Management and/or The Hartford had not received the necessary
documentation; the doctor's staff faxed to The Hartford
copies of the documentation it requested, including her
medical records; she personally faxed some of the requested
information to The Hartford; and she placed several phone
calls to Leave Management and/or The Hartford to confirm its
receipt of the faxes.
Valerie
Bautista, a management analyst on the Leave Management team,
testified that on October 20, 2017 she sent a letter to
Jordan via Federal Express. This letter is a point of
contention between the parties. It stated that The Hartford
was "unable to obtain appropriate medical
documentation" from Jordan's health care provider
regarding her leave. Ex. 3 to Def.'s SUMF, dkt. no. 46-1,
at 110. Like the September 29 letter, this letter did not
state whether Leave Management or The Hartford had received
any medical documentation relating to Jordan's leave or,
if they had received such documentation, what more they
needed. The letter said that if Jordan did not provide
medical documentation by October 27, 2017 or return to work
on or before the next day on which she was scheduled to work,
her employment would be terminated, and she would be
considered to have voluntarily resigned from her position,
pursuant to Marsh's short-term disability policy. The
letter contained no reference to the FMLA.
Jordan
contends that she did not receive the October 20, 2017 letter
until after her termination. She testified that she received
a Federal Express package on October 23, 2017 but that it
contained another copy of the September 29, 2017 letter from
the Hartford, not the October 20, 2017 letter from Leave
Management. Marsh disputes this and asserts that its records
show that the package should have contained the October 20,
2017 letter.
On
October 31, 2017, Marsh decided to terminate Jordan on the
ground that she had failed to provide the necessary medical
documentation and had not returned to work, as required by
Marsh's internal policy and as described in the October
20, 2017 letter. Dr. Dixit had never cleared Jordan to return
to work. According to testimony from a member of the human
resources team, the managers who made the termination
decision understood, based on e-mails from Leave Management,
that The Hartford had not received the requisite medical
information from Jordan or her doctor.[3]
On the
same day as Jordan's termination, The Hartford sent her a
letter indicating that her FMLA leave was approved from
August 15, 2017 to September 30, 2017. The letter stated that
The Hartford had "reviewed the medical information
submitted on October 31, 2017," although it is not clear
what this meant. Ex. 8 to Def.'s SUMF, dkt. no. 46-1, at
...