Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Green v. Intersolutions

June 6, 2007

LINDA GREEN, PLAINTIFF,
v.
INTERSOLUTIONS, INC., ET AL., DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Emmet G. Sullivan United States District Judge

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Plaintiff Linda Green filed an Amended Complaint against InterSolutions, Inc., Drew Golin, and Sarah Walder (collectively, "Defendants") alleging violations of the federal Family and Medical Leave Act ("FMLA"), 29 U.S.C. § 2601, et seq., and the District of Columbia Family and Medical Leave Act ("DCFMLA"), D.C. Code § 32-501, et seq.*fn1 Pending before this Court is Defendant's motion to dismiss Green's claims of FMLA and DCFMLA violations for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Upon consideration of the motion, response and reply thereto, and applicable law, the Court DENIES Defendants' motion.

I. BACKGROUND

InterSolutions, Inc., owned by Drew Golin and Sarah Walder, provides concierge, leasing, and maintenance staffing to residential and commercial properties. Plaintiff Linda Green was employed by InterSolutions from December 2003 to August 1, 2006. In or around May 2004, Green was promoted from an hourly wage employee to the permanent salaried position of Manager of InterSolutions' Front Desk/Concierge Department in the Washington, D.C. office. As Manager, Green was responsible for screening and placing temporary workers, and developing and maintaining relationships with InterSolutions' clients. Green's job function required that she spend a substantial amount of time visiting clients' worksites. By Spring 2005, the Front Desk/Concierge Department, managed by Green, was four to five times more profitable than it was prior to Green's promotion to Manager.

In or around January 2006, Defendants hired John Wagithuku as Chief Executive Officer. In April or May 2006, Green was diagnosed with breast cancer. Green informed Defendant Walder and believes that Walder relayed the information to Wagithuku on the same day. From May to July 2006, Green requested and was granted intermittent hours of medical leave to visit doctors and receive breast cancer treatment. Green alleges that in or around May 2006, Wagithuku, with the knowledge and consent of Golin and Walder, began discriminating against Green as a result of, among other things, Green's medical leave.

On or around June 9, 2006, Green underwent breast cancer surgery for which she was admitted to a hospital. Green was unable to perform the functions of her job during this time and took one day of medical leave. In mid-June 2006, Wagithuku requested that Green provide "doctor slips" for all past and future medical leave. Am. Compl. ¶ 57. Green requested this information from her doctors but was terminated from InterSolutions before she had the opportunity to provide such "doctor slips" to Defendants. On July 7, 2006, Green underwent a second breast cancer surgery for which she was admitted to a hospital. Green was unable to perform the functions of her job during this time and again took one day of medical leave.

In or around mid-July 2006, Green became aware and informed Wagithuku that she would need intermittent medical leave during August and September for daily breast cancer radiation treatment. Green confirmed this intermittent medical leave with Wagithuku in writing on July 26, 2006. Also on July 26, 2006, Green confirmed with Wagithuku in writing that she would need two hours of leave on the morning of July 27, 2006 for a doctor's appointment.

On July 28, 2006, Green received a letter from Wagithuku detailing her job responsibilities and criticizing her performance. This was the first such criticism she received from Wagithuku. The letter included notification that Defendants would closely monitor Green's performance and threatened her with discipline and/or termination if her performance did not improve.

On August 1, 2006, Wagithuku gave to Green a letter from Defendant Golin, in which Golin stated his disappointment with Green's job performance. This was the first such criticism Green received from Golin. Golin outlined a "performance plan" for Green and threatened termination if she did not comply within eleven days. Am. Compl. ¶ 69. Once she received the letter, Green left InterSolutions' office to meet with a patient advocate. Later the same day, Defendants terminated Green. Green claims that as a result of her termination she has suffered extreme emotional and economic harm.

Subsequently Green filed a complaint in this Court claiming that InterSolutions violated, among other things, the FMLA and DCFMLA. On April 16, 2007, Defendants filed the instant motion to dismiss Counts III and VI of Green's Amended Complaint, which allege violations of the FMLA and DCFMLA.

II. ANALYSIS

A. Standard of Review

Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure tests the legal sufficiency of a complaint. Browning v. Clinton, 292 F.3d 235, 242 (D.C. Cir. 2002). A complaint must present "enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face," and "above the speculative level." Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 1965, 1974 (2007). The Court will accept as true all factual allegations in the complaint, and give the plaintiff the benefit of all inferences ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.