Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): S.Ct. 554, 2 L.Ed.2d 539 (1958) (“in considering a motion for summary judgment, the court is entitled to consider exhibits and other papers that have been identified by affidavit or otherwise made admissible in evidence”) (emphasis added). Discussion The FMLA was enacted by Congress in 1993, in part to address problems arising from “inadequate job security for employees who have serious health conditions that prevent them from working for temporary periods.” 29 U.S.C. § 2601(b)(1). The act was designed to provide a balance between “entitling] employees to take reasonable leave for medical reasons” and “accommo-dat[ing] the legitimate interests of employers.” 29 U.S.C. §§ 2601(b)(l-2); see Callison v. City of Philadelphia, 430 F.3d 117, 119 (3d Cir.2005) (citing 29 U.S.C. § 2601(b)(1)) (<HOLDING>). The FMLA grants eligible employees the right 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that the trial court must balance the right to counsel of choice against the needs of fairness and the demands of its calendar (B) holding that the effects of the victims deaths upon the families is part of the circumstances of the crime and is properly presented to the jury at the penalty phase (C) holding that both the cfra and the fmla require the employee to provide notice to the employer of the employees intent to take leave (D) holding that  825220c is a reasonable interpretation of the statutes prohibition on interference with and restraint of employees rights under the fmla  2615a1  and that the labor departments conclusion that employer use of the taking of fmla leave as a negative factor in employment actions  violates  the act is  a reasonable one (E) holding that one of the primary purposes of the fmla is to balance the demands of the workplace with the needs of families 
Output (English): holding that both the cfra and the fmla require the employee to provide notice to the employer of the employees intent to take leave