Case ID: f-appx_227/html/0494-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "ALICE M. BATCHELDER, Circuit Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Darlene FLOWERS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. HONIGMAN, MILLER, SCHWARTZ AND COHN LLP, a Michigan limited liability partnership, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 05-1829.
    United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.
    July 9, 2007.
    BEFORE: KENNEDY, BATCHELDER and CLAY, Circuit Judges.
   ALICE M. BATCHELDER, Circuit Judge.

Darlene Flowers appeals the district court’s grant of summary judgment to her former employer, Honigman, Miller, Schwartz and Cohn LLP (“Honigman”), in this action brought under the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 2611-2654. Ms. Flowers claims that Honigman terminated her employment in retaliation for her taking FMLA time to care for her mother and husband.

The district court, after reviewing the record before it, concluded that Ms. Flowers failed to provide any evidence to suggest that Honigman’s decision to terminate her was pretext for retaliation.

We have undertaken a de novo review of the record, applicable law, and the parties’ briefs. We conclude that the district court’s opinion correctly sets out and applies to the undisputed facts the law governing FMLA retaliation claims, and that the issuance of a full written opinion by this court would serve no useful purpose. Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the district court’s opinion, we AFFIRM.