• When an Employment Negotiation Breaks Down Over a Maternity Leave Request, the Search for What Actually Motivated the Employer Gets Complicated
  • September 28, 2017 | Author: Jacalyn Chinander
  • Law Firm: Meagher & Geer, P.L.L.P. - Minneapolis Office
  • In LaPoint v. Family Orthodontics’, P.A., 892 N. W.2d 506 (Minn.2017) the Minnesota Supreme Court considered the legal standard for proving pregnancy discrimination under the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA). Family Orthodontics rescinded a job offer to LaPoint shortly after she disclosed that she was pregnant. Id. at 508. The facts are rather remarkable for an employment discrimination case because the reasoning behind the employer's decision-making was transparent and well-documented: on three occasions—in a voicemail message and an e-mail message to LaPoint and in her own handwritten notes scribbled across LaPoint's resume—Family Orthodontics's owner repeated the two concerns that prompted the reversal: (1) she questioned why LaPoint had not disclosed her pregnancy during their j ob interview;and (2) she was concerned that the length of the maternity leave LaPoint expected would be too disruptive to her small practice. Id. at 509.