Gardner

Gardner v. Federal Express Corp.

Good Law
114 F. Supp. 3d 889·2015 WL 4192588·2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 90065
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJuly 10, 2015Case No. 14-cv-01082-TEHCalifornia7,273 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Henderson, J.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

This matter is before the Court on the Parties’, motions for summary judgment. After carefully considering the Parties’ written- and oral arguments, the Court hereby GRANTS IN PART AND DENIES IN PART the motions for summary judgment, as set forth below.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Robert Gardner was a full-time Ramp Transport Driver (RTD) at the Oakland yard facility of Defendant Federal Express Corporation (“FedEx”) when he suffered an on-the-job injury to his neck and shoulder on January 30, 2013. *894 Gardner Decl. ¶2 (Docket No. 36). On February 6, Gardner was placed on a paid medical leave of absence, during which he reported to FedEx’s Human Capital Management Program (“HCMP”), the department that oversees employees on medical leave. Ex. A to Matheis Decl. at 51:2-7 (Gardner Dep.) (Docket No. 37-1). Gardner’s case was handled by HCMP Advisor Kathy Cline, and on occasion HCMP Ad-visor Ramona McMaster. Gardner Decl. ¶ 3.

FedEx Policy 1-8 provides employees with up to 90 days of job-protected medical leave. Ex. 107 to Matheis Decl. (Docket No. 37-4). After the exhaustion of the 90 days of medical leave, a…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.