Leichter v. St. Vincent’s Hosp.,

Leichter v. St. Vincent’s Hosp.,
No. 94 Civ. 7537 (DAB) (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 28, 2001)

The Southern District of New York denied a hospital summary judgment in a Title
VII discrimination suit brought by the hospital’s Department of Medicine’s Business
and Faculty Practice Manager ("the Manager"). The Manager had been
responsible for finance and billing operations, supervision of personnel, purchasing
and maintaining equipment, ordering supplies, scheduling patients, and handling
personnel issues for the faculty practice and medical service corporation. After
leaving for her six-month maternity leave, the Manager noticed ads in the newspaper
soliciting applicants for a Faculty Practice Manager at the hospital. The hospital
claimed that it had developed an expansion plan for the practice that required
additional administrators and that it had decided to employ two individuals,
rather than one, to perform the Manager’s old duties.

Upon returning from her maternity leave, the Manager claimed that her duties
were reduced to those of a receptionist. The new Faculty Practice Manager occupied
her office, used her computer and telephone, and supervised the personnel that
the Manager used to have direct authority over. After complaining to the Directors,
the Manager was notified that she would be reporting to the new Faculty Practice
Manager in the future. Eventually, the Manager asserted, she was excluded from
meetings and fingered for violations she did not commit. She was eventually
terminated.

The Southern District of New York District Court found that the Manager had
set forth a prima facie case of discrimination since she alleged, and provided
evidence supporting her allegation, that the hospital subjected her to "diminished
material responsibilities." The court likewise held that the Manager could
survive summary judgment since she had provided more than minimal evidence indicating
that the hospital’s explanation for its restructuring of her job (i.e., the
planned expansion) was a pretext. The court made similar findings in upholding
the Manager’s retaliation claims.