Question as to Whether Discrimination Was Motivating Factor in Physician’s Termination Reverses Trial Court Dismissal
A Washington Court of Appeals reversed a trial court’s order dismissing a physician’s state law gender discrimination claim against a university following her termination from employment. The trial court found that the university produced evidence of a legitimate nondiscriminatory reason for not renewing the physician’s contract and that the physician produced no evidence that the university’s reason was merely a pretext for a discriminatory purpose. Upon reversing the trial court’s order, the Court of Appeals found that there was a genuine issue as to whether discrimination was a motivating factor in the university’s decision to terminate the physician. Litvack v. Univ. of Washington
Court Rejects Fraudulent Inducement Claim Related to Settlement Agreement
The United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida granted, in part, a hospital’s motion for judgment on the pleadings against several contract claims filed by a physician and his medical practice. The physician was summarily suspended from the hospital. Both parties later entered into a separation agreement, the terms of which included his resignation from the medical staff and a report to the National Practitioner Data Bank (“NPDB”). The agreement also included language releasing all claims against the hospital in connection with his resignation. The physician sued, asserting several state law claims and alleging that the hospital fraudulently induced him into the agreement through alleged misrepresentations and that no consideration was given in exchange for the release language. Looking at the totality of the circumstances, the court found that the physician had no right to rely upon the hospital’s alleged misrepresentations because, among other things, the physician was represented by counsel, the physician was in an antagonistic and distrusting relationship with the hospital, and the agreement included non-reliance and merger clauses. In addition, the court rejected the physician’s argument that the release language lacked consideration and pointed out, in part, that the hospital allowed the physician to review the NPDB report before it was filed, which it found constituted valid consideration for the release. Morrison v. Delray Med. Ctr., Inc.