Robert J. Balding v. Sunbelt Steel Texas, Inc., et al.

This Court and Congress have emphasized the national importance of adequate job security and worklife balance for employees who have serious health conditions that prevent them from working for temporary periods. But significant corruptions and splits have developed as to whether and when a private employer can interfere with, restrain, deny—and even retaliate against—an employee for exercising, or even attempting to exercise, his rights under the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 2601, et seq. and the Americans With Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101, et seq. In this case, the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit and the District Court adopted admittedly, and applied, incorrect standards, even though genuine disputes of material fact exist. This case thus raises important and compelling issues never addressed by this Court, but which arise frequently, as to whether and if a private employer can violate, disregard, or ignore important standards and safeguards. Thus, the specific question presented is: Whether an employer violates an employee’s FMLA or ADA rights by interfering with, retaliating against, denying accommodations, and taking adverse action—including termination of the employee who is out on protected and approved leave—without any meaningful or fair investigation by the decision makers, and by asserting a pretext that it acted