In most cases, terminating an employee while they are on FMLA leave is risky and should only occur under limited circumstances. For example, termination may be appropriate if the employee is part of a broader layoff affecting multiple employees or if the decision to terminate was fully documented and finalized before the employee began FMLA leave. Otherwise, employers may face claims of FMLA interference or retaliation, which can result in significant legal and financial liability.

In the case of Haran v. Orange Business Services, No. 24-2312 (2^nd Circuit Court of Appeals, 11/25/25), Patricia Haran was fired by Orange Business Services, Inc. (OBS) after several of the largest accounts she managed decided to stop using OBS’s services. In the months before her termination, Haran had taken eight and a half days paid time off to care for her sick daughter and mother.  However, it was her performance that was at issue.

In her mid-2020 performance review, her manager, Adam Kimmick, noted challenges related to her newly assigned accounts, including concerns about projected revenue and communication issues with both her team and client. Prior to 2020, however, she had performed well and was entrusted with increasingly important accounts. Given her strong track record, Kimmick expressed confidence that her performance would improve during the remainder of the year and assigned her an overall rating of “fully successful.”

In October 2020, Haran requested time off to take care of her daughter, who needed surgery. Kimmick told her to take all the time she needed. Neither Haran nor Kimmick mentioned the FMLA. Over the course of three months, Haran intermittently took seven and a half days off, using her available paid time off. During the last quarter of 2020, OBS was negotiating a new master agreement with one of its largest accounts, and negotiations stalled. Kimmick asked Haran whether she would be able to maintain the pace of her conversations with the account, and a coworker told her that Kimmick would reassign the account to him if she could not participate in upcoming conversations.  Although no one at OBS made any negative comments about her taking time off, Harran felt pressure to work and used less time off to care for her daughter.

In her performance review for the second half of 2020, Haran received an overall rating of “needs improvement.” Although she met both her performance objectives for her mid-level accounts and her annual revenue quota, three of her largest accounts decided to stop using OBS’s products. Kimmick wrote that she had made some progress in building a strategy with her team, but the challenges noted in her prior review continued. In the performance discussion, Kimmick also stated that she did not have enough revenue to support her 2021 revenue objectives.

In February 2021, Haran’s mother was diagnosed with a serious health condition. Haran requested a day off to take her mother to an appointment, which Kimmick approved. Again, neither Haran nor Kimmick mentioned the FMLA, and Haran used PTO.

Two weeks later or so, Haran was terminated for performance, specifically on the expectation that she would not meet her 2021 quota.

Haran sued for FMLA interference and retaliation. At the District Court level in a motion for summary judgment, the court held for OBS finding that Haran failed to introduce sufficient evidence for a jury to conclude she was denied benefits under the FMLA. The court also held that her retaliation claim failed because Haran never actually exercised rights under the FMLA.

On appeal, the 2^nd Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court. Although Haran claimed that OBS subjected her to undue scrutiny and criticism of her job performance after she requested leave, the leave was never mentioned or used as a reason for her termination. In fact, the court found that OBS always allowed her the time off as requested. She had performance issues that were well documented and resulted in the loss of major clients for the organization. Her belief that her time off was being used negatively against her was not enough to support any retaliation or interference claims.

Haran also knew of her FMLA rights and told an employee that she “should have taken family medical leave off but [she] didn’t want to let the company down.”

The 2^nd Circuit Court of Appeals then ruled that Haran’s FMLA retaliation claim failed because “any reasonable jury would be required to find that OBS terminated her based on her job performance, not her request for or decision to take leave.” OBS articulated a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for her termination, and the court found no evidence of pretext.

The takeaway from this case for HR is to make sure that performance issues are documented, especially in performance reviews, and to ensure that all managers are trained in FMLA and all employees are trained in the process to ask for it. In this case, the court found that there was no harm since OBS allowed her all the time off she requested without question. Her termination was upheld.

Source: Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP 12/30/25