Darlene Flowers v. HONIGMAN, MILLER, SCHWARTZ AND COHN LLP, a Michigan limited liability partnership

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION
File Name: 07a0485n.06
Filed: July 9, 2007
Case No. 05-1829
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
DARLENE FLOWERS,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
HONIGMAN, MILLER, SCHWARTZ AND
COHN LLP, a Michigan limited liability
partnership,
Defendant-Appellee.
______________________________________
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ON APPEAL FROM THE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT
COURT FOR THE EASTERN
DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
BEFORE: KENNEDY, BATCHELDER and CLAY, Circuit Judges.
ALICE M. BATCHELDER, Circuit Judge. Darlene Flowers appeals the district court’s
grant of summary judgment to her former employer, Honigman, Miller, Schwartz and Cohn LLP
(“Honigman”), in this action brought under the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA), 29
U.S.C. §§ 2611-2654. Ms. Flowers claims that Honigman terminated her employment in retaliation
for her taking FMLA time to care for her mother and husband.
The district court, after reviewing the record before it, concluded that Ms. Flowers failed to
provide any evidence to suggest that Honigman’s decision to terminate her was pretext for
retaliation.
We have undertaken a de novo review of the record, applicable law, and the parties’ briefs.
We conclude that the district court’s opinion correctly sets out and applies to the undisputed facts

-- 1 of 2 --

2
the law governing FMLA retaliation claims, and that the issuance of a full written opinion by this
court would serve no useful purpose. Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the district court’s
opinion, we AFFIRM.

-- 2 of 2 --