Shore v. Children’s Mercy Hosp. — Dec. 2015 (Summary)

DISCRIMINATION

Shore v. Children’s Mercy Hosp.
WD 78530 (Mo. Ct. App. Dec. 22, 2015)

The Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed a summary judgment order in favor of a hospital against racial discrimination and retaliation claims brought under the Missouri Human Rights Act. The court found that the physician failed to show that a genuine issue of fact existed as to whether (i) the physician’s race (Caucasian) was a contributing factor to his employment termination, and (ii) the physician was fired for engaging in protected activity, namely complaining that his supervisor was discriminating against him.

The Court of Appeals stated the plaintiff physician’s own testimony showed that his physician supervisor, Dr. Woods, an African-American, had been friendly with him during his first five years of employment. Dr. Woods had invited the physician to play tennis, attend social events, join his fantasy football league, and serve as a mentor for junior physicians. The physician acknowledged that his relationship with Dr. Woods did not change until after he had complained for months about having to move his office to another building, and, even more so, had made a comment about treating sickle cell patients that Dr. Woods found to be offensive and racist in nature. The court noted that the physician was fired after numerous complaints brought by nurses and others regarding alleged inappropriate conduct by the physician, including the use of offensive language.

In light of these facts, the Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s finding of summary judgment with regard to the physician’s racial discrimination claim because the physician did not show a genuine issue of fact existed as to whether he was discriminated against because he was Caucasian. With regard to the physician’s retaliation claim, the Court of Appeals rejected the physician’s argument that he was retaliated against because he had complained to human resources that he believed Dr. Woods’ thought he was racist. The Court of Appeals noted those complaints took place two years prior to the physician being fired. Since those complaints were made, the physician had been the subject of numerous complaints brought by nurses and others for offensive and rude behavior. The Court of Appeals found the trial court did not err in finding the physician’s termination was related to continuing problems with his performance rather than complaints he made against his supervisor.