Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-05564/USCOURTS-cand-4_16-cv-05564-11/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 751
Nature of Suit: Labor - Family and Medical Leave Act
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TERESA AGUIRRE,

Plaintiff,

v.

THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 16-cv-05564-HSG 

[DRAFT SUBSTANTIVE] FINAL JURY 

INSTRUCTIONS

Case 4:16-cv-05564-HSG Document 203 Filed 01/06/19 Page 1 of 9
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Final Jury Instruction No. _ Re:

Elements of FMLA Interference Claim

To succeed on her FMLA claims against the State of California, Ms. Mills, or Ms. Huss, 

Ms. Aguirre must prove each of the following facts by a preponderance of the evidence as to each 

Defendant:

1. That Ms. Aguirre was eligible for the FMLA’s protections. This element is established;

2. That Ms. Aguirre’s employer was covered by the FMLA. This element is established;

3. That Ms. Aguirre was entitled to leave under the FMLA. This element is established;

4. That Ms. Aguirre provided sufficient notice to the Defendant of her intent to take leave; 

and

5. That the Defendant denied Ms. Aguirre FMLA benefits to which she was entitled.

For the fifth element, you must determine whether the Defendant interfered with, 

restrained, or denied Ms. Aguirre’s exercise of or attempt to exercise her FMLA rights by 

requiring her to report to the Marysville location by 12:30 p.m. each day. 

You do not need to find that the Defendant intentionally interfered with, restrained, or 

denied Ms. Aguirre’s use of her right to unpaid leave. The question is not whether the Defendant

acted with bad intent, but rather whether Ms. Aguirre was entitled to leave and the Defendant

interfered with, restrained, or denied the exercise of that leave.

Case 4:16-cv-05564-HSG Document 203 Filed 01/06/19 Page 2 of 9
3

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Final Jury Instruction No. _ Re:

Elements of CFRA Interference Claim

To succeed on her CFRA claims against the State of California, Ms. Mills, or Ms. Huss, 

Ms. Aguirre must prove each of the following facts by a preponderance of the evidence as to each 

Defendant:

1. That Ms. Aguirre was eligible for family care leave. This element is established;

2. That Ms. Aguirre requested leave to care for her father, who had a serious health 

condition. This element is established;

3. That Ms. Aguirre provided reasonable notice to the Defendant of her need for family 

care leave, including its expected timing and length;

4. That the Defendant interfered with, restrained, or denied Ms. Aguirre’s exercise of or 

attempt to exercise her family care leave rights;

5. That Ms. Aguirre was harmed; and

6. That the Defendant’s conduct was a substantial factor in causing Ms. Aguirre’s harm.

For the fourth element, you must determine whether the Defendant interfered with, 

restrained, or denied Ms. Aguirre’s exercise of or attempt to exercise her family care leave rights 

by requiring her to report to the Marysville location by 12:30 p.m. each day. 

For the sixth element, a substantial factor in causing harm is a factor that a reasonable 

person would consider to have contributed to the harm. It must be more than a remote or trivial 

factor. It does not have to be the only cause of the harm. Conduct is not a substantial factor in 

causing harm if the same harm would have occurred without that conduct.

Case 4:16-cv-05564-HSG Document 203 Filed 01/06/19 Page 3 of 9
4

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Final Jury Instruction No. _ Re:

Reasonable Person Standard 

You must determine whether the State of California, Ms. Mills, and/or Ms. Huss interfered 

with or discouraged Ms. Aguirre’s use of her FMLA and/or CFRA leave in a way that would have 

dissuaded a similarly situated employee of ordinary resolve from exercising or attempting to 

exercise his or her FMLA and/or CFRA rights.

Case 4:16-cv-05564-HSG Document 203 Filed 01/06/19 Page 4 of 9
5

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Final Jury Instruction No. _ Re:

Damages – Proof 

It is the duty of the Court to instruct you about the measure of damages. By instructing you 

on damages, the Court does not mean to suggest for which party your verdict should be rendered.

If you find for Ms. Aguirre, on either her FMLA claim or her CFRA claim, or on both 

claims, you must determine her damages. Ms. Aguirre has the burden of proving damages by a 

preponderance of the evidence. Damages means the amount of money that will reasonably and 

fairly compensate Ms. Aguirre for any injury you find was caused by the State of California, Ms. 

Mills, or Ms. Huss. 

It is for you to determine what damages, if any, have been proved.

Your award must be based upon evidence and not upon speculation, guesswork or 

conjecture.

Case 4:16-cv-05564-HSG Document 203 Filed 01/06/19 Page 5 of 9
6

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Final Jury Instruction No. _ Re:

Damages – Mitigation

Ms. Aguirre has a duty to use reasonable efforts to mitigate damages. To mitigate means to 

avoid or reduce damages.

The Defendants have the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence:

1. that Ms. Aguirre failed to use reasonable efforts to mitigate damages; and

2. the amount by which damages would have been mitigated.

Case 4:16-cv-05564-HSG Document 203 Filed 01/06/19 Page 6 of 9
7

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Final Jury Instruction No. _ Re:

Damages – FMLA

The damages calculation is different under the FMLA and CFRA. I will first instruct you 

on how to calculate damages if you find a violation of the FMLA, and then on how to calculate 

damages if you find a violation of the CFRA.

If you find that Ms. Aguirre has proved each element she must prove to succeed on her 

FMLA claim, you must decide the issue of her damages.

The measure of damages for Ms. Aguirre is either lost wages and benefits or other 

expenses incurred because of the FMLA violation. Ms. Aguirre can recover lost wages and 

benefits, or she can recover other expenses incurred because of the State of California, Ms. Mills, 

or Ms. Huss’s actions—but not both.

If Ms. Aguirre proved that she lost wages or benefits because of the FMLA violation, then 

Ms. Aguirre may recover net lost wages and benefits.

If you find that Ms. Aguirre did not directly lose pay or benefits because of the FMLA 

violation, then you may award Ms. Aguirre the actual monetary loss that directly resulted from the 

FMLA violation. This amount of damages cannot exceed 12 weeks of Ms. Aguirre’s wages or 

salary.

Lastly, the FMLA does not allow Ms. Aguirre to recover for any mental or emotional 

distress or pain and suffering that may have been caused by the FMLA violation. But Ms. Aguirre 

may recover lost wages for missed work due to mental or emotional distress caused by a wrongful 

interference with her FMLA leave.

Case 4:16-cv-05564-HSG Document 203 Filed 01/06/19 Page 7 of 9
8

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Final Jury Instruction No. _ Re:

Damages – CFRA

If you find that Ms. Aguirre has proved each element she must prove to succeed on her 

CFRA claim, you must decide the issue of her damages.

The damages claimed by Ms. Aguirre for the harm caused by the CFRA violation fall into 

two categories, called economic damages and noneconomic damages. You will be asked on the 

verdict form to state the two categories of damages separately.

The following is the specific item of economic damages claimed by Ms. Aguirre:

1. Ms. Aguirre’s past lost earnings.

To recover damages for past lost earnings, Ms. Aguirre must prove the amount of the 

wages that she has lost.

The following are the specific items of noneconomic damages claimed by Ms. Aguirre:

1. Past and future mental suffering;

2. Loss of enjoyment of life;

3. Physical impairment;

4. Inconvenience;

5. Grief;

6. Anxiety;

7. Humiliation; and

8. Emotional distress.

No fixed standard exists for deciding the amount of these noneconomic damages. You 

must use your judgment to decide a reasonable amount based on the evidence and your common 

sense.

To recover for mental suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, physical impairment, 

inconvenience, grief, anxiety, humiliation, and other emotional distress, Ms. Aguirre must prove 

that she is reasonably certain to suffer that harm.

For future mental suffering, loss of enjoyment of life, physical impairment, inconvenience,

grief, anxiety, humiliation, and other emotional distress, determine the amount in current dollars 

Case 4:16-cv-05564-HSG Document 203 Filed 01/06/19 Page 8 of 9
9

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

paid at the time of judgment that will compensate Ms. Aguirre for future mental suffering, loss of 

enjoyment of life, physical impairment, inconvenience, grief, anxiety, humiliation, and other

emotional distress. 

Case 4:16-cv-05564-HSG Document 203 Filed 01/06/19 Page 9 of 9