Balasubramaniam v. County of Los Angeles
| Decision Date | 25 January 2000 |
| Docket Number | No. B123069.,B123069. |
| Citation | 92 Cal.Rptr.2d 480,77 Cal.App.4th 929 |
| Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
| Parties | Subramaniam BALASUBRAMANIAM, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES et al., Defendants and Respondents. |
Law Offices of Raymond P. Boucher and Raymond P. Boucher, Los Angeles, and Michel C. Eyerly, for Plaintiff and Appellant.
Hausman, Sosa & Hudson, Jeffrey M. Hausman and Larry D. Stratton, Encino, for Defendants and Respondents County of Los Angeles and Martin Luther King, Jr./Drew Medical Center.
Littler Mendelson, Lester L. Jones, Douglas A. Wickham and Brandie N. Charles, Los Angeles, for Defendant and Respondent Charles R. Drew University of Medicine & Science.
Appellant Subramaniam Balasubramaniam, M.D., appeals from a judgment entered against him and in favor of respondents County of Los Angeles Department of Health Services (County); Martin Luther King, Jr./Drew Medical Center (MLK/Drew); and Charles R. Drew University of Science and Medicine (Drew). We affirm in part and reverse in part.
Appellant contends that: (1) The trial court should have applied the doctrine of res judicata to the findings of fact and conclusions of law reached by the Los Angeles County Civil Service Commission (Commission); (2) the trial court made erroneous evidentiary rulings which prejudiced appellant; and (3) the trial court erred in awarding costs to respondents.
On January 17, 1996, the Commission adopted the findings and recommendation of its hearing officer that appellant be given a genuine and equal opportunity to be promoted to the permanent position of chair of the department of emergency medicine at MLK/Drew.
The hearing officer defined the issues before her as follows:
Appellant, an East Indian born in Sri Lanka, was hired in 1978 by the County as the associate division chief of emergency division at MLK/Drew. At that time, there was no emergency department and no need for a chair. Subsequently, as division chief, appellant developed curricula and clinical practices for the emergency department.
Appellant applied for department accreditation with the accreditation council for graduate medical education (ACGME). The application was approved, and appellant became director of the residency program in 1980. There was no board to certify physicians in emergency medicine until 1979 or 1980. ACGME representatives who subsequently questioned appellant about his lack of board certification agreed that he had equivalent qualifications and there was no problem with his lack of board certification in his position as director of the residency program.
The statement of facts outlined appellant's attempts to assume the position of chair from 1984. Dean Alfred Hanes, an African-American, remarked to appellant that since MLK/Drew is an African-American institution, appellant would be offered a position as chair only in order to groom an inexperienced African-American vice-chair, Dr. Caspar Glenn, for the permanent position. Appellant declined the position, and Dr. Schlater, an African-American physician, was appointed as acting chair. Medical Director Jim Haughton, an African-American, asked appellant to replace Schlater as the acting chair, but was forced to rescind his offer by hospital administrator William Delgardo, who believed that if a nonAfrican-American was in the position, the African-American community which the hospital served would riot.
In January 1991, MLK/Drew appointed 70-year old Dr. Shoemaker, a nonAfrican-American, whose experience was in the department of surgery, as the permanent chair. Dr. Shoemaker's attempt to appoint appellant as the vice-chair was rejected because the hospital wanted an African-American permanent chair. Instead, Dr. Hardin, an African-American, was given the position of vice-chair in order to be groomed for the permanent chair position. During his tenure as vice-chair, Dr. Hardin added 10 points to the scores of African-American applicants for the department of emergency residency program in order to increase the number of African-American residents, to the exclusion of nonAfrican-American applicants.
In 1993, the ACGME notified MLK/ Drew that it intended to withdraw accreditation of the residency program because, among other things, while Dr. Shoemaker had an excellent background in his field, he had limited emergency medicine practice experience.
After Dr. Shoemaker was removed, Dr. H. Range Hutson, an African-American who was not a civil service employee, was hired in January 1994 to fill the chair position. No job postings for the position were distributed after Dr. Shoemaker's removal. Appellant was never considered for the 1994 position, despite the fact that he was the highest ranking doctor in the department of emergency medicine, he was the most experienced faculty member, had currently and in the past been rated as "outstanding," and had trained residents in emergency medicine since 1979. While Dr. Edward Savage, a member of the selection committee, testified that he did not consider appellant because his residency had not been in emergency medicine, appellant completed his residency in surgery before emergency medicine was a recognized specialty in which residency training was available. Moreover, Dr. Savage's testimony that appellant had no significant publications in emergency medicine was based on a 1978 resume. Appellant's current resume showed approximately 50 publications in emergency medicine. The selection committee did not seriously consider other nonAfrican-American members of the MLK/Drew Department of Emergency Medicine faculty who were board certified in emergency medicine and had outstanding credentials.
Soon after he assumed the position of acting chair, Dr. Hutson summarily discharged Dr. Kram, a White physician who worked with Dr. Shoemaker. In the ensuing litigation, the director of human resources for MLK/Drew declared that Dr. Hutson, who was not a full-time civil service employee, had no direct control and supervision over County employees, and his actions could not be recognized. In March 1994, Dr. Savage assumed the position of acting chair and was actively involved in attempting to eliminate the requirement that department chairs be civil servants.
The hearing officer found that appellant had presented a prima facie case of discrimination, and that the County's rationale for its failure to consider appellant for the position was pretextual. The hearing officer did not believe Dr. Savage's explanation that appellant was not hired because the ACGME required department chairs to be board certified in the specialty of the department in which they served and because Dr. Savage found appellant to be lacking in other areas.
The sources upon which Dr. Savage relied for his understanding of the requirements stated to the contrary. The ACGME standards stated that a chair must be either board certified or the equivalent, as interpreted by the ACGME board upon review of the candidate's curriculum vitae. That same information was also conveyed to Dr. Savage by Glenna Case, the executive secretary for the ACGME.
The hearing officer specifically rejected Dr. Savage's argument that board certification was the primary issue for the ACGME, stating: "Thus the primary issue for the ACGME was not board certification, but experience and involvement in emergency medicine necessary to the training of emergency medicine residents, along with a recognizable commitment to the field." Rather, the hearing officer concluded that Dr. Savage used board certification as an easy way to differentiate between appellant and Dr. Hutson.
The hearing officer found that for purposes of the chairmanship, the County and Drew are coemployers and agents because: (1) The job announcement which preceded the appointment of Dr. Shoemaker stated, "`This position involves a dual-appointment by the Medical Center and the Charles R. Drew University as Chief of Emergency Medicine Services and Chairman of the Department of Emergency Medicine, respectively'"; (2) the members of the selection committee representing both entities acted jointly throughout the selection and hiring process; and (3) the fact that actions of a representative of either entity with respect to the ACGME and the chairmanship of the emergency department would bind both entities.
The hearing officer concluded that race was a determining factor in the selection of a department chair in denying appellant the promotional opportunity he sought, and that on the basis of his qualifications and experience as acting chair, 1
On December 23, 1996, appellant filed his second amended complaint (SAC) for: (1) violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (); (2) negligence; and (3) intentional infliction of emotional distress against the County; MLK/Drew; Drew; Robert Gates; Walter Gray; Edward Savage, M.D.; Edward Renford; Jarron Gammons; Reed Tuckson, M.D.; and Roy Wilson, M.D.2
The SAC's basic allegations mirrored the...
To continue reading
Request your trial