Summary
This United States District Court order partially grants and partially denies Amazon.com Services, LLC’s motion for summary judgment in an employment dispute brought by former employee Katie Chapman-Pinto. The court denies summary judgment on the plaintiff’s Family Medical Leave Act interference claim due to a genuine factual dispute regarding whether she voluntarily resigned during her leave. Conversely, the court grants summary judgment on her Americans with Disabilities Act discrimination claim because she failed to provide sufficient evidence that her termination was motivated by her disability.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Chapman-Pinto voluntarily resigned, thereby precluding liability for FMLA interference.
- Whether Amazon terminated Chapman-Pinto because of her disability in violation of the ADA.
Holdings
- The court denied Amazon’s motion for summary judgment on the FMLA interference claim, finding a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether the plaintiff voluntarily resigned.
- The court granted Amazon’s motion for summary judgment on the ADA discrimination claim, finding the plaintiff failed to show that the termination was because of her disability.
Key quotations
“I THEREFORE ORDER that defendant Amazon.com Services, LLC’s motion for summary judgment (ECF No. 27) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The motion is granted as to Chapman-Pinto’s claim for discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act and denied as to her claim for interference under the Family Medical Leave Act.” (at 6)
Factual background
Chapman-Pinto was an operations manager at Amazon's Las Vegas sorting facility. She took approved FMLA leave from Nov. 25, 2022 to Jan. 8, 2023. While on leave she turned in equipment and told an HR employee she was "done, I'm out." Amazon later emailed her a notice of voluntary termination effective Dec. 17, 2022. She disputes having resigned and alleges termination because of her disability.
Procedural history
The plaintiff filed suit after alleged termination while on leave. The court partially granted the defendant's motion to dismiss, leaving FMLA interference and ADA discrimination claims. The defendant then moved for summary judgment on both claims.