The work days missed by an alcoholic employee while he sought, but did not receive, treatment for a relapse was not protected by the Family and Medical Leave Act rules the Seventh Circuit. The employee’s absences had put him over the limit for absenteeism under the company’s attendance policy, and he was subsequently terminated.

Although the employee’s physician averred that the employee’s “treatment” began when he first contacted the doctor’s office for an appointment, the Court says that the FMLA’s definition of treatment “does not include actions such as calling to make an appointment. Treatment would include examinations to determine if a serious health condition exists and evaluation of the condition.” Since the employee did not produce any evidence that he was being examined or evaluated on the disputed days, he was not entitled to FMLA leave on those dates, the Court holds. Darst v. Interstate Brands Corp.