King v. Garfield Cnty. Pub. Hosp. Dist. No. 1, Corp.
| Citation | 17 F.Supp.3d 1060 |
| Decision Date | 01 May 2014 |
| Docket Number | No. 12–CV–0622–TOR.,12–CV–0622–TOR. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Washington |
| Parties | Dennis KING and Tricia King, husband and wife, Plaintiff, v. GARFIELD COUNTY PUBLIC HOSPITAL DISTRICT NO. 1, a municipal corporation, et al., Defendant. |
Ronald A. Van Wert, Jeffrey Ryan Galloway, Etter, McMahon, Lamberson, Clary & Oreskovich, PC, Spokane, WA, for Plaintiff.
Susan Wilder Troppmann, Andrea L. Asan, Paukert & Troppmann PLLC, Michael E. McFarland, Jr., Markus William Louvier, Evans Craven & Lackie PS, Edward Joseph Bruya, Keefe, Bowman & Bruya, P.S., Spokane, WA, Jason Matthew Lamb, Joseph Arthur Walker, The Walker Law Firm, Newport Beach, CA, for Defendant.
BEFORE THE COURT are Defendant Terrence McGee, M.D., and Jane Doe McGee's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 60); and Defendants Garfield County Hospital District No. 1, Blaine Beehler, Michele Beehler, Andrew Craigie, and Barbara Craigie's Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 70),1 Motion to Strike Statement of Facts (ECF No. 86), Motion to Shorten Time to Hear Motion to Strike (ECF No. 97), and Motion to Expedite (ECF No. 96). This matter was heard with oral argument on April 16, 2014. Ronald Van Wert and Jeffrey Galloway appeared on behalf of the Plaintiff. Susan Troppmann appeared on behalf of Defendants Craigie, Beehler, Morrow, and Garfield County Public Hospital District No. 1. Mark Louvier appeared on behalf of Defendant Dr. McGee. The Court has reviewed the briefing and the record and files herein, and is fully informed.
This case concerns a hospital employee's termination for alleged drug diversion and use after the employee tested positive in a drug test. Plaintiff Dennis King sued his former employer, Garfield County Hospital District No. 1 and hospital employees (collectively, “GCHD”), as well as a company and physician allegedly involved in the drug test. GCHD and the physician here move for summary judgment on the claims against each.
Plaintiff Dennis King, a registered nurse, was employed with Defendant GCHD prior to the termination forming the basis for the instant lawsuit. Pl.'s Statement of Facts, ECF No. 73 at 2. At the time of the events in question, Defendant Andrew Craigie was the GCHD's Chief Executive Officer; Defendant Michele Beehler was Human Resources Director; Susan Morrow was Chief Nursing Officer; and Barbara DeHerrera was Long–Term Care Manager and King's direct supervisor. Id. at 3.
On February 1, 2011, a Tuesday, King had a tooth extracted, which resulted in a painful bone spur for which his dentist prescribed Tylenol
# 3 with codeine. ECF No. 73 at 4; King Depo. at 36:9–11. The prescription dosage was 300 milligrams of acetaminophen and 30 milligrams of codeine ; the prescription indicated that King could “take 1 or 2 tablets by mouth every 4–6 hours as needed for pain.” ECF No. 73–6; Pl.'s Statement of Facts, ECF No. 73 at 5.
King worked a 12–hour weekend day shift, making his regularly scheduled working days Saturday, Sunday, and Monday, starting at 7 a.m. ECF No. 73 at 4. He worked his regularly scheduled shifts on February 5, 6 and 7. Pl.'s Statement of Facts, ECF No. 73 at 5; King Depo. at 41:12–15.
Medications dispensed to GCHD patients are documented in the “medication administration report.” Pl.'s Statement of Facts, ECF No. 73 at 6; King Depo. at 48:15–24. Procedure dictated that when staff members administering medication would pull the dose from the locked medication cart or cabinet, they would record the amount that should be remaining after the dose was removed. King Depo. 47:1–47:24, ECF No. 68–1 at 13. The staff member signs the medical administration record. King Depo. 48:23–48:24, ECF No. 68–1 at 14. Nurses also perform a narcotic count at the end of each shift and sign to indicate who is responsible for the count. Morrow Depo. 61:16–61:24, ECF No. 68–3 at 8.
During his shifts on February 5 and 6, King gave four doses of morphine
each day; on February 7, he administered one dose. King Depo. 55:18–56:3, ECF No. 68–1 at 16–17. King's last signature on the morphine sulphate log is for February 7 at 8 a.m. Morrow Depo. 48:5–48:11, ECF No. 73–2 at 18. Another staff member, Ms. Jilek, signed out morphine sulphate doses at 8 p.m. and 11:15 p.m. on February 7, and at 2 a.m. and 5:15 a.m. on February 8. Morrow Depo. 50:14–51:12, ECF No. 73–2 at 19–20. At the end of his shift on February 7, at 7:30 p.m., King's signature appears on the narcotic count log. King Depo. 56:3–57:19, ECF No. 68–1 at 17–18.
The next day at 7 a.m., another nurse, Ms. Bell, notified King's supervisor Barbara DeHerrera that there was a discrepancy; DeHerrera then notified Morrow. Morrow Depo. 66:12–66:22, ECF No. 68–3 at 9. Bell had discovered a 19 milliliter overage in the morphine
sulphate bottle; the doses accounted for indicated that the remaining medication should be 15 milliliters, but the actual amount in the bottle of morphine
was 34 milliliters. Morrow Depo. 55:23–56:6, ECF No. 62–2 at 7.
GCHD did not test the morphine
to determine whether it had been diluted; rather, the bottle of morphine was returned to the manufacturer, where it was destroyed. Morrow Depo. 56:18–56:25, 57:22–57:23, ECF No. 62–2 at 7.
After his shift ended on February 8, King was not scheduled to work for several more days. On February 8, 9, and 10, King ingested between two and four tablets of Tylenol
# 3 with codeine each day. Pl.'s Statement of Facts, ECF No. 73 at 9. He received a call on the evening of February 10 informing him that a mandatory meeting would take place at GCHD the next day. Id. On February 11, a scheduled day off for King, King took one tablet of Tylenol # 3 with codeine before attending the mandatory meeting. Id. at 9–10.
When King arrived at GCHD he was informed that the mandatory meeting was a drug test and the employees were required to submit a urine sample for analysis. Id. Morrow informed the employees that the drug testing was in response to a discrepancy in the narcotic count. Morrow Depo. 77:19–78:11, ECF No. 73–2 at 32–33. Morrow indicated that King showed no signs of drug use or impairment. Morrow Depo. 79:20–82:9, ECF No. 73–2 at 34–36.
The drug test was conducted by QCL, Inc. Pl.'s Statement of Facts, ECF No. 73 at 13. QCL contracted with OHS Health & Safety Services for medical review officer professional services. See Exhibit 11, ECF No. 73–11 at 2. Defendant Dr. Terrence McGee was the medical review officer responsible for interpreting the test results, and interpreted King's test results. Morrow Depo. 19:9–13, ECF No. 62–2 at 4; Exhibit 11, ECF No. 73–11 at 5; Pl.'s Statement of Facts, ECF No. 73 at 15.
On February 18, Morrow called King and informed him that the test results had shown that his morphine
levels were very high, that he was being put on leave, that he could not come into work, and that there would be a meeting on February 22 to discuss. King Depo. 88:3–88:23, ECF No. 68–2 at 1. King requested that Dr. McGee be present at the meeting. Pl.'s Statement of Facts, ECF No. 73 at 17.
During the February 22 meeting, Beehler, DeHerrera and Morrow were present from GCHD, and Dr. McGee appeared telephonically. Pl.'s Statement of Facts, ECF No. 73 at 17. King brought the prescription bottle containing his remaining tablets of Tylenol
# 3 with codeine. Pl.'s Statement of Facts, ECF No. 73 at 18. Though disputed, King states that Dr. McGee told him that his urinalysis produced near fatal levels of morphine and contained a trace of codeine. Pl.'s Statement of Facts, ECF No. 73 at 19. King told Dr. McGee that he had taken a tablet of Tylenol # 3 on the morning of the drug test. Pl.'s Statement of Facts, ECF No. 73 at 19. King claims that Dr. McGee never asked him how many doses he had taken. Pl.'s Statement of Facts, ECF No. 73 at 19–20. At the time of the meeting, Dr. McGee does not appear to have submitted a report with the results of King's urinalysis.
Exhibit 18, ECF No. 73–18 (emphasis in original).
Codeine
metabolizes into morphine. Richard Barclay, Ph.D Depo., ECF No. 73–13 at 3. Plaintiffs' expert testified that the results of King's drug test were not consistent with the use of morphine suspected to be diverted from the hospital because the codeine and morphine ratio was much higher than would be expected had morphine been used in addition. Id. at 3. The expert stated that “the amount of codeine and morphine found in that sample taken on that morning [of the drug test administered by GCHD] is a result of multiple doses and sequential doses of codeine, not from a single tablet.” Id. at 6. He also testified that Dr. McGee's finding that King's dose was “near fatal” was “way out of line.” Id. at 5.
GCHD terminated King March 29, 2011. Exhibit 25, ECF No. 73–25. The termination letter informed King that his “termination is the result of failure to comply with section 3.16 of the employee handbook Substance Abuse and Testing.” Id. The letter further provided that “The reasonable suspicion test was performed on 2/11/11 was found to have positive test results for Opiates of Codeine
and Morphine.” Id.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
King v. Garfield Cnty. Pub. Hosp. Dist. No. 1, Corp.
...17 F.Supp.3d 1060Dennis KING and Tricia King, husband and wife, Plaintiff,v.GARFIELD COUNTY PUBLIC HOSPITAL DISTRICT NO. 1, a municipal corporation, et al., Defendant.No. 12–CV–0622–TOR.United States District Court, E.D. Washington.Signed May 1, 2014Order Denying Reconsideration June 6, Mot......