Millicent Bailey v. Southwest Gas Company

Good Law
2002 Daily Journal DAR 629·275 F.3d 1181·2002 WL 59061·81 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 40,871·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 452
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 17, 200200-15796California2,785 words

Opinion

Opinion

Tallman, J.

In this case we consider an employer’s and an employee’s duties and obligations under the Family Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”), codified at 29 U.S.C. §§ 2601-2654 . Millicent Bailey appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment on her claims for interference with her rights under the FMLA, and for retaliatory discharge under Nevada law. Bailey contends that her employer, Southwest Gas Company (“Southwest”), terminated her in violation of the FMLA, and that her discharge constitutes unlawful retaliation under state law. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We disagree and affirm.

I

Southwest hired Bailey in 1992 as a Customer Service Representative. Bailey had indicated on her job application that she would be available to work full time, weekends, holidays, and overtime. Bailey was assigned the day shift (8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.), but was required to work the evening shift (2:30 p.m. to 11:00 p.m.) for one week every three months. Like all Customer Service Representatives, Bailey was also expected to work overtime beyond the end of her shift if service orders remained to be completed. Bailey’s duties included driving to customer residences to respond to complaints,…

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.