Abdul-Haqq v. Permanente Med. Grp.

Decision Date12 October 2022
Docket Number3:19-cv-03727-JD
PartiesJAMILAH ABDUL-HAQQ, Plaintiff, v. PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP, INC., et al., Defendants.
CourtU.S. District Court — Northern District of California
ORDER RE SUMMARY JUDGMENT RE THE PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP

JAMES DONATO, United States District Judge.

Plaintiff Jamilah Abdul-Haqq filed this lawsuit against defendants The Permanente Medical Group (TPMG), Kaiser Foundation Hospitals (KFH), the California Nurses Association (CNA), and eight individuals, asserting various claims arising from her employment with TPMG. Dkt. No. 20. The Court dismissed all the claims except for Abdul-Haqq's wrongful termination claim against TPMG and her claim for violation of the duty of fair representation against CNA, Dkt. No. 82, and subsequently granted summary judgment for CNA on that count Dkt. Nos. 155, 156.

Consequently the sole remaining claim in this case is whether TPMG wrongfully terminated Abdul-Haqq from her job as a nurse in violation of public policy. Dkt. No. 82. The Court initially understood that this claim related only to Abdul-Haqq's allegations of retaliation for filing workplace complaints id., but the parties discussed disability discrimination as another potential public policy ground in their cross-motions for summary judgment, and so that will be taken up here as well. Dkt. No. 121 (TPMG motion); Dkt. No 126 (Abdul-Haqq motion).

The record before the Court indicated that TPMG had legitimate, non-discriminatory and non-pretextual reasons for terminating Abdul-Haqq's employment, and Abdul-Haqq did not demonstrate any genuine disputes of fact that might weigh against summary judgment. Dkt. No. 157. Even so, out of an abundance of caution in light of Abdul-Haqq's pro se status, the Court held a hearing on July 21, 2022, to allow Abdul-Haqq to identify the evidence that might warrant a trial. Dkt. Nos. 157, 177. The parties' familiarity with the record is assumed, and summary judgment is granted in TPMG's favor.

STANDARDS

Parties “may move for summary judgment, identifying each claim or defense -- or the part of each claim or defense -- on which summary judgment is sought. The court shall grant summary judgment if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a). A dispute is genuine “if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party.” Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986).

A fact is material if it could affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law. See Id. To determine whether a genuine dispute as to any material fact exists, the Court views the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, and “all justifiable inferences are to be drawn” in that party's favor. Id. at 255. The moving party may initially establish the absence of a genuine issue of material fact by “pointing out to the district court that there is an absence of evidence to support the nonmoving party's case.” Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 325 (1986). It is then the nonmoving party's burden to go beyond the pleadings and identify specific facts that show a genuine issue for trial. Id. at 323-24. “A scintilla of evidence or evidence that is merely colorable or not significantly probative does not present a genuine issue of material fact.” Addisu v. Fred Meyer, Inc., 198 F.3d 1130, 1134 (9th Cir. 2000).

“It is not the Court's responsibility to root through the record to establish the absence of factual disputes, or to look for evidence on the nonmoving parties' behalf.” CZ Servs., Inc. v. Express Scripts Holding Co., No. 3:18-cv-04217-JD, 2020 WL 4368212, at *3 (N.D. Cal. July 30, 2020) (citations omitted); see also Winding Creek Solar LLC v. Peevey, 293 F.Supp.3d 980, 989 (N.D. Cal. 2017), aff'd, 932 F.3d 861 (9th Cir. 2019).

DISCUSSION

“The central assertion of a claim of wrongful termination in violation of public policy is that the employer's motives for terminating the employee are so contrary to fundamental norms that the termination inflicted an injury sounding in tort.” Roby v. McKesson Corp., 47 Cal.4th 686 702 (2009) (citing Tameny v. Atl. Richfield Co., 27 Cal.3d 167, 176 (1980)). To prove a wrongful-termination claim, Abdul-Haqq must show that TPMG terminated her employment, that “the termination was substantially motivated by a violation of public policy,” and that “the discharge caused [her] harm.” Yau v. Santa Margarita Ford, Inc., 229 Cal.App.4th 144, 154 (2014).

Under California law, “disability discrimination can form the basis of a common law wrongful discharge claim.” City of Moorpark v. Superior Court, 18 Cal.4th 1143, 1161 (1998). For Abdul-Haqq to prove wrongful termination in this context, she must show that TPMG terminated her employment “because of the disability.” Prue v. Brady Co./San Diego, Inc., 242 Cal.App.4th 1367, 1378 (2015) (internal quotation and citation omitted).

TPMG presented solid evidence of non-discriminatory reasons for terminating Abdul-Haqq's employment. Several doctors reported that Abdul-Haqq committed errors in delivering nursing care, such as delay in administering medication and in responding to her work phone while on duty, delay in registering medication that had been administered, and failure to notify a treating physician that a patient under her care was hypotensive. See, e.g., Dkt. No. 121-1 Exhs. C, D, F, H. Additionally, an investigation found that Abdul-Haqq “participated in an inappropriate, unprofessional and loud hostile verbal argument with another employee that continued on throughout patient care areas” in the emergency department. Id., Exh. B. TPMG has also submitted evidence that Abdul-Haqq avoided meeting with a supervisor to discuss these incidents, and the meetings that did occur did not resolve the supervisor's concerns. Dkt. No. 1211 ¶¶ 9-10, 14, 16, 20, 23 (Gaustad declaration); see also id., Exhs. A, E. ...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT