## Facts

- Juanita Caldwell worked for Holland of Texas, Inc., operating KFC restaurants, and had an excellent work record.
- Caldwell’s three-year-old son became acutely ill and was diagnosed at an emergency clinic with an acute ear infection; a physician prescribed a ten-day antibiotic course and advised surgery might be needed to prevent permanent hearing loss.
- Caldwell notified her employer before a scheduled shift that she needed to miss work to take her son for medical care; the employer allowed the absence, and Caldwell later worked an evening shift at another location the same day.
- Caldwell asserted her son was incapacitated for more than three consecutive days, did not engage in normal activities, and required ongoing medical treatment.
- At a follow-up visit, the physician prescribed a second ten-day antibiotic course; about ten days later, the child underwent adenoid and tonsil surgery and received another week of antibiotics.
- When Caldwell returned to her regular schedule, Holland terminated her employment with little discussion.
- Caldwell sued alleging retaliation/interference under the FMLA for taking leave to care for a child with a serious health condition; the district court granted summary judgment to Holland on the ground the condition was not a serious health condition.

## Issues

1. Whether the summary-judgment record created a genuine dispute of material fact that Caldwell’s child had a “serious health condition” under the FMLA based on “continuing treatment by a health care provider.”
2. How “incapacity for more than three consecutive days” should be assessed for a very young child for purposes of the FMLA’s continuing-treatment regulations.

## Decision

- The Eighth Circuit reversed the grant of summary judgment and remanded.
- The court held there was a genuine issue of material fact whether the child’s condition satisfied the regulatory continuing-treatment standard.
- The court concluded that multiple medical visits, extended prescription regimens, and surgery constituted evidence supporting the “continuing treatment” prong.
- The court held that, for a young child, incapacity may be shown by evidence the child could not participate in normal routines and required home care, not solely by adult-oriented measures like inability to work or attend school.

## Legal Principles

- Under the FMLA, a “serious health condition” includes an illness involving “continuing treatment by a health care provider.”
- The continuing-treatment standard requires a two-part showing: (1) incapacity for more than three consecutive calendar days and (2) subsequent treatment or a continuing regimen of treatment supervised by a health care provider for the same condition.
- For very young children, “incapacity” may be evaluated through practical indicators such as inability to engage in normal daily activities, need for at-home care, and whether ordinary childcare would accept the child.
- On summary judgment, courts must view evidence in the nonmovant’s favor and deny judgment if a reasonable jury could find the statutory/regulatory elements satisfied.

## Conclusion

The Eighth Circuit held that the medical record and evidence about the child’s condition at home could allow a reasonable jury to find a serious health condition under the FMLA, making summary judgment for the employer improper and requiring further proceedings on remand.


Caldwell v. Holland of Tex., Inc., 208 F.3d 671 (8th Cir. 2000)