Hate ads? Verify for LSD+ → Learn More

Case Citation
Legal Case Name

FLOTO v. Manhattan Woods Golf Enterprises, LLC Case Brief

District Court, S.D. New York2003Docket #2368878
270 F. Supp. 2d 401 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12297 84 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 41,516 2003 WL 21663702 Employment Law Contracts Civil Procedure

Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs

Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.

Adaptive Case Views

Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.

Exam-Ready IRAC Format

We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.

Complex Cases, Clarified

We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.

Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis

General Brief
4 min read

tl;dr: An employee was fired for taking a day off to be at the hospital for his mother’s emergency surgery. The court overturned a jury verdict, finding the employee failed to prove he was providing “care” under the FMLA, as mere presence is insufficient.

Legal Significance: Establishes that for FMLA leave, an employee must present affirmative evidence of providing physical or psychological care; merely being present at a hospital for a family member’s medical procedure, without more, does not satisfy the statutory requirement to “care for” the relative.

FLOTO v. Manhattan Woods Golf Enterprises, LLC Law School Study Guide

Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.

Case Facts & Court Holding

Key Facts & Case Background

Plaintiff Richard Floto, a sales manager for Manhattan Woods Golf Enterprises, LLC, was terminated after taking one day off from work. The purpose of his absence was to be at the hospital where his mother was undergoing emergency brain surgery for cancer. Floto had been told the surgery was high-risk. He informed his employer of the situation. Upon his return to work the next day, he was fired. Floto sued, alleging violations of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and breach of his employment contract, which permitted termination only for “reasonable cause.” At trial, Floto testified that he went to the hospital but provided no further details about his activities there. The evidentiary record was silent as to whether he saw his mother before the surgery, whether she was conscious or aware of his presence, or whether he participated in her care or medical decisions. A jury returned a verdict for Floto on both claims. The defendant then moved for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) on the FMLA claim, arguing Floto failed to adduce evidence that he qualified for FMLA leave.

Court Holding & Legal Precedent

Issue: Does an employee’s mere presence at a hospital during a parent’s serious medical procedure, without any evidence of providing physical or psychological comfort or participating in medical decisions, constitute “caring for” the parent to qualify for leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act?

No. An employee’s mere presence at a hospital is insufficient to satisfy Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in volupta

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

IRAC Legal Analysis

Premium Feature Unlock

Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades

IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.

Legal Issue

Does an employee’s mere presence at a hospital during a parent’s serious medical procedure, without any evidence of providing physical or psychological comfort or participating in medical decisions, constitute “caring for” the parent to qualify for leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act?

Conclusion

This case establishes that to receive FMLA protection, an employee must present Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud

Legal Rule

Under the Family and Medical Leave Act, an eligible employee is entitled Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cill

Legal Analysis

The court analyzed the FMLA's "to care for" standard, acknowledging that Department Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt

Flash-to-Full Case Opinions

Flash Summary

  • Court overturned a jury’s FMLA verdict, granting judgment as a matter
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehe

Master Every Case Faster

Unlock premium legal analysis that helps you quickly understand complex cases, designed by Harvard Law and MIT graduates. It's about working smarter, not just harder.

Start 14-Day Free Trial

Thousands of students are already saving time and gaining clarity. Why not you?

Hate ads? Verify for LSD+ → Learn More