A federal appeals court has reinstated a whistleblower's claim that he was unjustly fired by United Airlines after he complained repeatedly about the company failing to properly perform repair work on U.S. Air Force cargo planes.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit overturned a decision by a federal judge to dismiss the retaliation claim. A majority of the appeals court did, however, affirm the judge's decision to dismiss a False Claims Act claim against United for failure to state a claim.

But, the appeals court said, there was sufficient evidence to show that United did, in fact, retaliate against plaintiff David Grant for firing him after he made his complaints.

“Here, Grant's termination, falling close on the heels of his numerous complaints, represents the ultimate action that an employer can take against a reasonable worker for whistle-blowing,” wrote Judge Allyson Duncan for the court.

Judges J. Harvie Wilkinson III and Barbara Keenan joined in that portion of the ruling. Keenan said she would reinstate Grant's FSA claim, saying he presented enough evidence for the case  to go to a jury.

Grant worked for United from 2008 until 2014 at Charleston Air Force Base in South Carolina, according to the opinion. At the time he was a lead aviation maintenance technician whose job was to care for the engines for the Air Force's locally based fleet of C-17 Globemaster III cargo planes.

The engines are manufactured by Pratt & Whitney and, according to the ruling, United is the only company in the world with the expertise to properly maintain them.

In his complaint, Grant alleged that he observed that United superiors “pencil-whipped” through reports that said maintenance work was done when, in fact, the work was not done; that United workers used the wrong tools; and that maintenance was performed by United workers who had failed to complete eye and training exercises.

United fired Grant on May 6,  2014, after he once again complained to his superiors. He filed his lawsuit in February 2015.

U.S. District Judge David Norton, sitting in Charleston, dismissed the lawsuit on summary judgment. The federal government has since intervened in the lawsuit, although it did not participate in the appeal.

Even though the majority agreed with Norton the FCA allegations should be dismissed, it did agree with Grant to some extent.

“Taking the facts alleged as true, it was objectively reasonable for Grant to believe that United had committed fraud,” Duncan said. “Finally, the [complaint] supports a reasonable inference that Grant's actions were designed to stop one or more violations of the FCA.”

Neither Grant's attorney, William Norton, of the Mount Pleasant, South Carolina, office of Motley Rice, nor United's attorney, Keith Harrison, of the Washington office of Crowell & Moring, returned telephone calls.