California Civil Jury Instructions (CACI) (2017)

2610. Affirmative Defense - No Certification from Health-Care Provider

Download PDF
2610.Affirmative Defense—No Certification From Health-Care
[Name of defendant] claims that [he/she/it] denied [name of plaintiff]’s
request for leave because [he/she] did not provide a health-care
provider’s certification of [his/her] need for leave. To succeed, [name of
defendant] must prove both of the following:
1. That [name of defendant] told [name of plaintiff] in writing that
[he/she/it] required written certification from [name of plaintiff]’s
health-care provider to [grant/extend] leave; and
2. That [name of plaintiff] did not provide [name of defendant] with
the required certification from a health-care provider [within the
time set by [name of defendant] or as soon as reasonably
New September 2003
Directions for Use
The time set by the defendant described in element 2 must be at least 15 days.
Sources and Authority
• Certification of Health Care Provider. Government Code section 12945.2(k).
Certification of Health Care Provider: Child Care. Government Code section
• Certification of Health Care Provider: Return to Work. Government Code
section 12945.2(k)(4).
• “Health Care Provider” Defined. Government Code section 12945.2(c)(6).
• Notice and Certification. Cal. Code Regs., tit. 2, § 11088(b).
• “[S]ubdivision (k)(1) of [Government Code] section 12945.2 does not require
an employer to submit disputes regarding an employee’s entitlement to medical
leave to a third health care provider.” (Lonicki v. Sutter Health Central (2008)
43 Cal.4th 201, 211 [74 Cal.Rptr.3d 570, 180 P.3d 321], original italics.)
Secondary Sources
8 Witkin, Summary of California Law (10th ed. 2005) Constitutional Law,
§§ 942–944
Chin et al., Cal. Practice Guide: Employment Litigation ¶¶ 12:311, 12:880,
12:883–12:884, 12:905, 12:915 (The Rutter Group)
1 Wilcox, California Employment Law, Ch. 8, Leaves of Absence, § 8.26 (Matthew