Preview:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS
No. 89,560
WILLIAM GONZALEZ-CENTENO,
Appellant/Cross -appellee,
v.
NORTH CENTRAL KANSAS REGIONAL
JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITY,
Appellee/Cross-appellant.
SYLLABUS BY THE COURT
1.
We recognize in Kansas a cause of action for retaliatory discharge for exercising rights under the Kansas Workers Compensation Act against an employer other than the employer against which the workers compensation claim was or might be asserted.

2.
The elements of a prima facie claim for retaliatory discharge for filing a workers compensation claim are: (1) The plaintiff filed a claim for workers compensation benefits or sustained an injury for which he or she might assert a future claim for such benefits; (2) the employer had knowledge of the plaintiff's workers compensation claim injury;


(3) the employer terminated the plaintiff's employment; and (4) a causal connection existed between the protected activity or injury and the termination.
3.
In a retaliatory discharge action for the filing of a workers compensation claim, the burden of proof is on the complainant to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the respondent is guilty of terminating the employee for filing the claim. Initially, the complainant must present a prima facie case. Then the burden of going forward with the evidence shifts to the respondent, and this burden may be discharged by evidence of a legitimate, nonretaliatory reason for respondent's conduct. Once the respondent discharges this obligation, the complainant must continue with the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that the reasons offered by respondent were merely a pretext for the employer's wrongful termination.

4.
Whether an employer's discharging an employee for failing to call in an anticipated absence that results from a work-related injury gives rise to liability is a question of fact. Language to the contrary in Coleman v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 242 Kan. 804, Syl.

Download 89560.pdf

Kansas Law