FMLA Complaint

Below is what a Family Medical Leave Act complaint might look like. Do not use it yourself; instead, seek a lawyer’s advice before doing anything. Complaints are factually and legal-specific, so this is not to be used even as a sample:

Complaint

1.       The Plaintiff, John Doe, sues Defendant, X.Y.Z., Inc., for interference in violation of the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA).

2.       The Defendant, X.Y.Z., Inc., is a Florida corporation, and the Plaintiff, John Doe, resides in the same state.

3.       Plaintiff lives in Florida.

4.       The Honorable Court has original jurisdiction pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 2617.

5.       The Plaintiff, John Doe, was employed by the Defendant, X.Y.Z., Inc., as a manager in Gainesville, Florida, for a period of approximately 46 years. During this time, the Defendant violated the Plaintiff's rights under the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA).

6.       Venue is appropriate in this Division pursuant to the local rules as the operative facts occurred in Alachua County, Florida.

7. Plaintiff John Doe dedicatedly served Defendant for approximately 46 years.

8.       In the twelve months preceding his need for FMLA leave in June 2011, Plaintiff had worked in excess of 1250 hours for Defendant.

9.       Defendant employs in excess of 50 employees at Plaintiff’s physical place of employment.

10.     Plaintiff had a serious medical condition that qualified him for FMLA leave.

11. Defendant was fully aware of Plaintiff's impending surgery in June 2021 due to a serious medical condition.

12.     Plaintiff had notified Defendant that he was scheduled for back surgery in June 2020.

13.     Defendant was not pleased with the fact that Plaintiff was going to have surgery in June 2021 because, in 2019, Plaintiff had hip and knee replacements.

14.     Plaintiff was entitled to FMLA leave in June 2011.

15.     The defendant, in a clear violation of its obligations under the FMLA, failed to comply.

16.     Defendant was obligated to notify Plaintiff in writing of his FMLA rights in 2011 for his June 2011 surgery, allow him to have up to 12 weeks up, and reinstate him in his position.

17.     Defendant interfered with Plaintiff’s FMLA rights.

18.     Defendant terminated Plaintiff on June 1, 2021.

19.     However, for Plaintiff notifying Defendant that he had surgery scheduled for June 2021 that would require him to miss work, Defendant would not have terminated Plaintiff in early June 2011.

20.     Plaintiff lost wages and benefits due to Defendant’s interference with FMLA rights.

Wherefore, Plaintiff demands trial by jury, judgment, back pay, liquidated damages, reinstatement or front pay if reinstatement is not feasible, attorney’s fees, and costs.