White v. County of Los Angeles
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
CROSKEY, Acting P. J.
When an employee takes leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA) (29 U.S.C. § 2601 et seq.), the employee is entitled to be restored to employment upon certification from the employee’s health care provider that the employee is able to resume work.
The employer is not permitted to seek a second opinion regarding the employee’s fitness for work prior to restoring the employee to employment. The question presented by the instant case is whether, if the employer is not satisfied with the employee’s health care provider’s certification, the employer…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Sanders v. City of NewportCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- Brownfield v. City of YakimaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- Rodney Harrell v. United States Postal ServiceCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2006
- Sager v. County of YubaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2007
- Albert v. RunyonDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1998
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Atkins v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
- Ahmed Jamal v. Dodge & Cox, et al.District Court, N.D. California · 2026
- Atkins v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
- Cal. Dept Justice v. Bd. etc. Retirement SystemCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
- Davis v. City of Los Angeles CA2/7California Court of Appeal · 2014
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.