The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed a district court ruling that upheld Mountaire Farms of North Carolina Corporation's decision to terminate an employee who was unable to return to work after taking extended medical leave. The unpublished per curiam opinion in *Robinson v. Mountaire Farms of North Carolina Corp.*, filed Feb. 4, 2026, rejected former employee Craige Robinson's challenge to his termination.
Robinson began working at Mountaire's chicken-processing plant in February 2016. After two years with the company, he was promoted to the salaried position of rehang supervisor, a role he held until his employment was terminated. The case centers on events that began in 2021, when Robinson suffered serious injuries in an incident unrelated to his job.
The injuries Robinson sustained required surgery and an extended recovery period. As a result, Robinson took leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to recover from his injuries. When Robinson was medically cleared to return to work, he faced significant restrictions on his ability to perform his duties due to the lingering effects of his injuries.
Mountaire expressed skepticism about the work restrictions given the physical demands of Robinson's position as a rehang supervisor at the chicken-processing facility. The company and Robinson then engaged in what the court described as an "interactive process" to determine whether any accommodations could be made that would allow Robinson to continue his employment with the company.
Despite these efforts, the interactive process proved unsuccessful. The parties were unable to identify reasonable accommodations that would enable Robinson to perform his essential job functions while adhering to his medical restrictions. When Robinson's FMLA leave expired, Mountaire made the decision to terminate his employment.
Robinson subsequently filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina at Wilmington, challenging the termination. The case was assigned to District Judge James C. Dever III, who ultimately ruled in favor of Mountaire Farms. Robinson then appealed the district court's decision to the Fourth Circuit.
The Fourth Circuit panel, consisting of Circuit Judges Agee, Richardson, and Benjamin, heard oral arguments in the case on Nov. 5, 2025. After reviewing the record and considering the arguments presented by both parties, the appeals court issued its decision on Feb. 4, 2026.
The court's opinion was designated as unpublished, which means it does not establish binding precedent within the Fourth Circuit. Such opinions are typically issued in cases where the court determines that the legal principles involved are well-established and the case does not present novel legal issues that would benefit from published precedential guidance.
Robinson was represented on appeal by Ralph T. Bryant Jr. of the Ralph Bryant Law Firm in Greenville, North Carolina. Mountaire Farms was represented by J. Larry Stine and Elizabeth K. Dorminey of Wimberly, Lawson, Steckel, Schneider & Stine, P.C., based in Atlanta, Georgia.
The case highlights the complex intersection of employment law, disability accommodations, and FMLA leave. When employees suffer injuries that prevent them from performing their essential job functions, employers are required to engage in an interactive process to explore possible reasonable accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act. However, employers are not required to provide accommodations that would impose an undue hardship on their operations or fundamentally alter the nature of the position.
The FMLA provides eligible employees with up to 12 weeks of unpaid, job-protected leave for serious health conditions. However, the law does not guarantee that employees will be able to return to their exact same position if they are unable to perform the essential functions of their job, even with reasonable accommodations.
For employees in physically demanding industries like food processing, injuries that result in permanent work restrictions can present particular challenges. Employers in these industries must balance their obligation to provide reasonable accommodations with the safety requirements and operational demands of their facilities.
The Fourth Circuit's affirmance suggests that the district court properly applied established legal standards in evaluating Robinson's claims. The decision reinforces that employers who engage in good faith interactive processes and make termination decisions based on legitimate business needs related to an employee's inability to perform essential job functions are likely to prevail in subsequent litigation.
The case serves as a reminder to both employers and employees about the importance of the interactive process in disability accommodation cases and the limits of protections provided under federal employment laws when fundamental job requirements cannot be met despite reasonable accommodations.