Michelle Stringfield v. Cosentino's Food Stores

Eighth Circuit

Michelle Stringfield v. Cosentino's Food Stores

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedDecember 18, 2018

Docket18-1925

StatusUnpublished

This text of Michelle Stringfield v. Cosentino's Food Stores (Michelle Stringfield v. Cosentino's Food Stores) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Michelle Stringfield v. Cosentino's Food Stores, (8th Cir. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 18-1925 ___________________________

Michelle M. Stringfield

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

v.

Cosentino's Food Stores

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City ____________

Submitted: December 13, 2018 Filed: December 18, 2018 [Unpublished] ____________

Before BENTON, SHEPHERD, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

Michelle M. Stringfield appeals the adverse judgment the district court1 entered, following a bench trial, in her action under the Family and Medical Leave

1 The Honorable Beth Phillips, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. Act (FMLA). Stringfield, a former employee of Cosentino’s Food Stores, alleged that Cosentino impermissibly interfered with her right to take leave under the FMLA. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms.

Upon careful review of the district court record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, this court finds no basis to reverse the district court’s judgment. See Smith v. AS Am., Inc., 829 F.3d 616, 621-22 (8th Cir. 2016) (following bench trial, legal conclusions are reviewed de novo, and findings of fact are reviewed for clear error). There was no error in the district court’s determination that the notice Stringfield gave Cosentino regarding the need to take FMLA leave was untimely, and she was thus not entitled to FMLA leave. See Hasenwinkel v. Mosaic, 809 F.3d 427, 432 (8th Cir. 2015) (to prevail on FMLA entitlement claim, individual must show (1) she was entitled to FMLA leave; (2) her employer was on notice of her need for FMLA leave; and (3) the employer denied her FMLA benefits).

The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________

-2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 18-1925 ___________________________

Michelle M. Stringfield

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant

v.

Cosentino's Food Stores

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellee ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City ____________

Submitted: December 13, 2018 Filed: December 18, 2018 [Unpublished] ____________

Before BENTON, SHEPHERD, and STRAS, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

Michelle M. Stringfield appeals the adverse judgment the district court1 entered, following a bench trial, in her action under the Family and Medical Leave

1 The Honorable Beth Phillips, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri. Act (FMLA). Stringfield, a former employee of Cosentino’s Food Stores, alleged that Cosentino impermissibly interfered with her right to take leave under the FMLA. Having jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms.

Upon careful review of the district court record and the parties’ arguments on appeal, this court finds no basis to reverse the district court’s judgment. See Smith v. AS Am., Inc., 829 F.3d 616, 621-22 (8th Cir. 2016) (following bench trial, legal conclusions are reviewed de novo, and findings of fact are reviewed for clear error). There was no error in the district court’s determination that the notice Stringfield gave Cosentino regarding the need to take FMLA leave was untimely, and she was thus not entitled to FMLA leave. See Hasenwinkel v. Mosaic, 809 F.3d 427, 432 (8th Cir. 2015) (to prevail on FMLA entitlement claim, individual must show (1) she was entitled to FMLA leave; (2) her employer was on notice of her need for FMLA leave; and (3) the employer denied her FMLA benefits).

The judgment is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. ______________________________

-2-

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Michelle Stringfield v. Cosentino's Food Stores, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/michelle-stringfield-v-cosentinos-food-stores-ca8-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack