 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Linzy v. St. Mary's Medical Center6/4/2002
UNPUBLISHED
In this wrongful discharge from employment suit, plaintiff appeals as of right from an order granting defendant's motion for summary disposition pursuant to MCR 2.116(C)(10). Plaintiff, a registered nurse, claims wrongful discharge under contract and employment discrimination (race and age) theories. We affirm.
I. Facts and Procedural History
On August 27, 1997, defendant admitted a patient named Charley Martin to its cardiovascular holding unit. Plaintiff, a fifty-four or fifty-five-year-old African American, worked in defendant's cardiovascular holding unit as a cardiovascular services charge nurse. While in the unit, Martin began to complain of shoulder pain. Martin's assigned nurse, Lois Wilson, was apparently unable to contact Martin's doctor, Dr. Rehan Mahmud, or another doctor from the "Heart Group," so Wilson asked plaintiff for her advice.
Plaintiff wrote an order for Martin for the prescription drug Darvocet N100. Plaintiff maintains that, in writing the order, she followed standard operating procedures for the cardiovascular holding unit. Specifically, plaintiff asserts that doctors maintained hospital- approved standing orders to administer certain drugs without physician pre-approval. Under this system, plaintiff explained, the prescription would be noted as a verbal order and the doctor would sign the prescription after returning to the hospital. Wilson administered a dose of Darvocet to Martin before he was moved to another floor.
On August 29, 1997, John Lillistierna, a Caucasian in his thirties, took over as Martin's assigned nurse. Apparently, Lillistierna also had difficulty contacting Dr. Mahmud or the Heart Group doctors. Lillistierna wrote orders for Restoril, a narcotic drug requiring a prescription, and requested certain physician-ordered tests from the laboratory. Martin died on August 30, 1997, from causes apparently unrelated to the administration of either Darvocet or Restoril.
When Dr. Mahmud returned to the hospital, he signed the orders for Darvocet and Restoril, but noted on both that he was "on vacation." In addition, Dr. Mahmud brought the orders to the attention of nursing supervisors and later testified that he did not authorize a standing order for Darvocet. Defendant elected to discipline both plaintiff and Lillistierna for writing orders for medication requiring prescriptions. Defendant also reported the conduct to the State of Michigan for investigation.
On September 8, 1997, plaintiff received a termination letter from defendant for violating medical center policies and procedures. Defendant maintained that the letter was sent by mistake and that defendant reconsidered its position the following day. After defendant staff members met with both plaintiff and Lillistierna, defendant offered both nurses continued employment as nursing assistants while the state conducted its investigation. If appropriate, both nurses would be reinstated to their positions as registered nurses at the conclusion of the state investigation. Defendant submitted the offer to plaintiff in a letter dated September 15, 1997. Lillistierna accepted the offer, but plaintiff rejected it and resigned by letter dated September 15, 1997.
Plaintiff filed a complaint on July 28, 1998 and alleged that defendant terminated her because of her age and race in violation of the Civil Rights Act, MCL 37.2101 et seq. Plaintiff also claimed defendant breached an express and implied employment contract. On December 22, 1999, defendant filed a motion for summary disposition pursuant to MCR 2.116(C)(10).
After oral argument, the trial court granted defendant's motion for summary dispositi
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Michigan Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|