Placzek v. Mayo Clinic — July 2020 (Summary and PDF)

PHYSICIAN EMPLOYMENT

Placzek v. Mayo Clinic
Case No. 18-cv-2952 (JNE/KMM) (D. Minn. July 1, 2020)

The United States District Court District of Minnesota granted a clinic’s motion for summary judgment on claims that it violated the Minnesota Whistleblower Act (“MWA”) by terminating a physician’s privileges. The physician had signed an employment contract with a health system that was a wholly owned subsidiary of the clinic. However, the health system had its own board of directors and the clinic did not control their day-to-day operations. The physician gained privileges at the clinic through a Clinic Associate program the two entities had established and spent no more than 20% of her time at the clinic. During her time there, various concerns were raised about her conduct and interactions with patients. At some point during her appointment, the physician reported the clinic for violating common law and contractual obligations. Shortly after, her appointment was terminated. The physician sued under the MWA, asserting that the clinic terminated her in retaliation for reporting the alleged violations.

In granting summary judgment to the clinic, the court held that no reasonable jury would find that the clinic was the physician’s employer. In applying a test assessing different factors that can indicate the type of control that employers typically exert, the court found that the location of the work and source of equipment were not necessarily indicative of employee status because all hospital medical staff are skilled and must work inside the hospital using the hospital’s equipment. Furthermore, the remaining and more important factors weighed against the physician. The right to control the means and manner of performance was up to the hospital system, not the clinic. Moreover, the hospital system was the sole entity that paid her. And, the physician’s employment contract granted the right of termination to only the hospital system. Accordingly, because only an employer can be sued under the MWA, and no reasonable jury could find the physician to be an employee of the clinic, the court granted the clinic’s motion for summary judgment.