Philadelphia. Photo: Shutterstock

A federal judge has ruled in favor of the city of Philadelphia in a lawsuit brought by a former technology manager who claimed she faced retaliation for taking sick leave to address mental health issues.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Marilyn Heffley of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granted the city's motion to dismiss plaintiff Christina Adenike Gardiner's lawsuit alleging violations of the Family and Medical Leave Act, Americans With Disabilities Act and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act.

Heffley ruled that Gardiner failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether she can meet her evidentiary burden to establish FMLA retaliation.

Gardiner worked as a project manager in the city's Office of Innovation and Technology for four years. After defendant Michel Washington became her supervisor, Gardiner alleged he began to micromanage her and to express a belief that she could not adequately do her job, according to Heffley.

“In December 2016, Gardiner took several days of sick leave due to work stress related to her professional relationship with Washington. Gardiner also became ill with the flu at some point in early 2017 and did not come to work. Upon her return to work, Gardiner was involved in a meeting that Charles Brennan ('Brennan'), then the chief innovation officer, described as an 'absolute disaster.' On February 15, 2017, Washington sent Gardiner an email stating that Gardiner was perceived as 'indifferent, aloof and uncommitted,' and that Washington hoped that Gardiner would 'show positive changes immediately,'” Heffley said.

Gardiner later took sick leave for depression and anxiety, however, her doctor never diagnosed her with those conditions, Heffley said. She was subsequently terminated for “performance deficiencies.” Gardiner's lawsuit followed.

Heffley first addressed Gardiner's FMLA claims and the city's request to dismiss.

“Here, Gardiner has not established a prima facie case of FMLA retaliation given her failure to present sufficient evidence regarding the first element of a prima face case, namely that she invoked her right to FMLA-qualifying leave,” Heffley said.

The judge said Gardiner calling in sick without further information did not qualify as adequate notice to her employer under the FMLA and therefore did not trigger any obligations on the city's part under the act.

“Contrary to Gardiner's assertion,” Heffley said, “a reasonable factfinder could not infer that Gardiner provided the defendants with reasonably adequate notice to make them aware that she was seeking FMLA leave for her absence or that the defendants were on notice that she was using sick leave for a potentially FMLA-qualifying reason.”

Wayne Ely represents the plaintiff and declined to comment on the ruling. Christopher Rider of the City Law Department said he could not comment on the matter.