Shervin v. Partners Healthcare Sys., Inc. — Oct. 2015 (Summary)

GENDER DISCRIMINATION

Shervin v. Partners Healthcare Sys., Inc.
No. 14-1651 (1st Cir. Oct. 9, 2015)

The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit affirmed a jury verdict in favor of a healthcare system and others in a suit brought by a female physician claiming gender discrimination and retaliation. The physician was part of the Harvard Combined Orthopedics Residency Program. In her fourth year of her residency, she was put on probation. The probation was imposed after a colleague raised specific patient care issues and expressed concerns about the physician’s professionalism and technical competence. According to the opinion, the program’s director imposed probation without attempting less significant interventions because of the physician’s “stoic response to his concerns” and “in his 35 years of supervising residents, he had never disciplined a woman resident and not seen her cry.” The physician alleged that this incident “marked the beginning of a steady stream of retaliatory and discriminatory acts that clouded the remainder of her residency” and ultimately adversely affected her job prospects.

On appeal, the physician argued, among other things, that the district court erred in calculating the statute of limitations for her discrimination and retaliation claims. The physician contended that her claims did not accrue until the probation hindered her ability to obtain a medical license. The court disagreed, stating that the statute of limitations for a cause of action for discrimination begins “upon the time of the discriminatory acts, not upon the time at which the consequences of the acts [become] most painful.” Further, the physician not only had immediate notice of the adverse effects of the probation but also recognized the gravity of the probation based off of her efforts to reverse it immediately. The court also found that several evidentiary rulings were not improper and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in giving the challenged jury instruction.