Auluck v. County of Alameda (Summary)

AGE DISCRIMINATION; RETALIATORY DISCHARGE

Auluck v. County of Alameda, No. C-13-05511(EDL) (N.D. Cal. Feb. 18, 2014)

The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted a plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint in a suit alleging that the county and health care services agency violated his free speech rights and discriminated against him due to his advanced age.  After expressing concerns about the quality of hospital care provided to patients of the county’s Juvenile Justice Center, the 69-year-old psychiatrist plaintiff was put on administrative leave.  The leave was only lifted after he complied with a number of specific conditions, including case monitoring and enrollment in a remedial course on record keeping.  The psychiatrist submitted his resignation when he was placed on administrative leave for the second time.  The defendant then filed an “805 report” with the Medical Board of California, stating that the psychiatrist resigned while a fitness for duty investigation was pending.  The Medical Board of California subsequently evaluated the psychiatrist and determined that there was no evidence to suggest the plaintiff was unfit for duty.  The defendant filed a motion to strike the plaintiff’s causes of action based on the 805 report, which the court granted.  However, the court ruled that the defendant was not immune for filing a document along with the report, which the plaintiff alleged was fraudulent, because the plaintiff adequately alleged that the report was filed with malice.