Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: August 25, 2014
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comNew Jersey employers typically send required legal notices by regular mail via the U.S. Postal Service (USPS). And for good reason — the “mailbox rule” of the courts has long held that a letter sent to the correct address with proper postage affixed creates the legal presumption that it was received.

A recent decision by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, however, may alter employers’ expectations, particularly with respect to critical notices sent under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). In Lupyan v. Corinthian Colleges, Inc., the court held that sending notices via USPS may not suffice to satisfy the statute’s notice requirements.
Under the FMLA, employers must provide employees with notice of their eligibility for FMLA protection as well as their rights and responsibilities within five business daysof having enough information to determine whether the requested leave qualifies for FMLA leave. The failure to provide FMLA notices may constitute an interference, restraint or denial of the exercise of the employee’s FMLA rights. FMLA violations can result in the award of monetary damages and attorneys’ fees as well as equitable relief such as reinstatement.
Lisa Lupyan was working as a teacher for Corinthian Colleges, Inc. when she began to suffer from depression. At the suggestion of her employer, Lupyan took a personal leave of absence from her position. After she provided medical certification of her illness, Corinthian College determined that Lunyan’s leave qualified under the FMLA and sent her the required paperwork by regular mail with the U.S. Postal Service.
When Lupyan attempted to return to work after receiving clearance from her doctor, Corinthian informed her that she had been terminated for failing to return to work within the maximum 12 weeks allowed by law. Lupyan claimed that she had no knowledge that she was on FMLA leave, and subsequently filed suit against the employer for interfering with her FMLA rights. Thus, the central issue of the case was whether she was properly notified that her leave was designated as being FMLA leave and the requirements of such leave.
The Third Circuit concluded that sending a legal document via certified mail provides a “strong presumption” of receipt. However, a “weaker presumption” arises where delivery is sent via regular mail for which no proof of delivery or receipt is generated. In such case, the court ruled that the presumption of receipt can be rebutted through a simple denial.
As further explained by the court:
“In this age of computerized communications and handheld devices, it is certainly not expecting too much to require businesses that wish to avoid a material dispute about the receipt of a letter to use some form of mailing that includes verifiable receipt when mailing something as important as a legally mandated notice. The negligible cost and inconvenience of doing so is dwarfed by the practical consequences and potential unfairness of simply relying on business practices in the sender’s mailroom.”
In light of the Third Circuit’s decision, employers should always use any delivery method that provides confirmation of delivery. In addition to providing written notice of applicable legal requirements, it is advisable to reinforce the notice requirement by meeting with the affected employee to discuss the employment issue, such as FMLA leave, and to answer any questions to ensure proper understanding.
If you have questions about the FMLA notices or want to ensure that your business is in compliance, please contact me, Gary Young, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck Labor and Employment attorney with whom you work.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

IP infringement occurs when someone uses your intellectual property without your permission or beyond the scope of the permission you granted. Common examples of IP infringement include copying a product’s patented features or using a trademarked logo in a way that is likely to confuse consumers about the source or affiliation of goods or services. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

When facing public allegations of wrongdoing, companies should not let the speed of the public conversation dictate the speed of an investigation. An investigation designed to confirm a preferred narrative rather than establish the facts can create serious problems later, particularly if litigation, regulatory scrutiny, or employment claims follow. Key Takeaways When public allegations surface […]
Author: Sean M. Pena

For battery energy storage system (BESS) developers, securing equipment and site control is only part of the development equation. A project must also connect to the electric grid, and increasingly, BESS interconnection is one of the biggest sources of schedule, cost, and contractual risk. Key Takeaways This article is Part 3 of our Battery Storage […]
Author: Nicholas Wall

Director and officer liability increases sharply when a company is in financial distress. Decisions that would draw little attention in a healthy business can later be challenged by creditors, shareholders, bankruptcy trustees, and regulators as breaches of fiduciary duty, fraudulent transfers, or oversight failures. Understanding where that exposure comes from, and how to manage it, […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

For developers pursuing battery energy storage system (BESS) projects, finding the right property is only the beginning. BESS site selection is as much a legal and transactional exercise as a real estate decision, with risk analysis central to the project’s ultimate success. Key Takeaways The core questions for BESS site selection in New York and […]
Author: Nicholas Wall

What should you expect when meeting a litigation attorney about a business dispute? You should expect to describe the dispute in your own words, hand over the most important documents, flag any deadlines or immediate threats, and leave with a clearer picture of the problem, what information is still needed, and the likely next steps. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!