Fejes v. Gilpin Ventures, Inc.
United States District Court for the District of Colorado
960 F. Supp. 1487 (1997)
- Written by Haley Gintis, JD
Facts
Susan Fejes (plaintiff) was hired by Gilpin Casino (defendant) as a blackjack dealer. After working for nearly one year, Fejes took unpaid medical leave due to pregnancy complications, authorized by the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). Fejes gave birth while on leave and was scheduled to return to work on June 8, 1994. On June 15, Fejes received a call from her supervisor, requesting that Fejes work the following weekend. Fejes told her supervisor that she could not work over the weekend because she was breastfeeding and had concerns that she had not yet adopted an appropriate feeding schedule for the baby. On July 8, Fejes received a letter from the human-resources department informing Fejes that she was considered self-terminated. Fejes protested the termination, and Gilpin Casino agreed to rehire her. However, on July 14, Fejes received a second letter informing her that because she had allowed her gaming license to expire, she had been terminated. Fejes filed suit against Gilpin Casino, alleging that she had been terminated because of gender and pregnancy discrimination in violation of the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) of 1978 because Gilpin Casino refused to accommodate Fejes’s breastfeeding schedule. Fejes also alleged that her termination violated the FMLA. Gilpin Casino moved for summary judgment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Babcock, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.