Marrin v. Capital Health Sys., Inc.
| Decision Date | 31 May 2017 |
| Docket Number | Civil Action No. 14-2558 (FLW)(LHG) |
| Parties | JANICE MARRIN, Plaintiff, v. CAPITAL HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC., JOAN DUVALL, and CAROLANN BASS, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey |
**NOT FOR PUBLICATION**
:
Before the Court are the cross motions of Plaintiff Janice Marrin ("Plaintiff" or "Marrin") and Defendants Capital Health Systems, Inc., Joan DuVall, and Carolann Bass ("Defendants") for summary judgment on the claims raised in Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint under the New Jersey Conscientious Employee Protection Act, N.J. Stat. Ann. §§ 34:19-1 et. seq. ("CEPA"), New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, N.J. Stat. Ann. § 10:5-12 ("NJLAD"), and the Family Medical Leave Act of 1993, 29 U.S.C. §§ 2601 et. seq. ("FMLA"). Plaintiff contends that Defendants discriminated against, interfered with, and retaliated against Plaintiff on the basis of her taking FMLA protected leave by terminating her after the completion of an allegedly fraudulent progressive discipline program. Defendants contend that Plaintiff has failed to state a prima facie case for discrimination or retaliation, and, in any event, was terminated for a legitimate business purpose after she failed to cooperate with Defendants' internal investigation into missing confidential documents, some of which were found in Plaintiff's possession. For the reasons that follow, this Court grants summary judgment in favor of Defendants on all Counts of the Second Amendment Complaint and denies Plaintiff's cross motion.
Plaintiff began working for Defendant Capital Health Systems, Inc. ("Defendant" or "Capital Health") in Trenton, New Jersey, in November 2005. Tr. of Aug. 20 and Aug. 27, 2015 Dep. of Janice Marrin ("Marrin Dep."), at 35:8-18; Defendants' Statement of Material Facts ("DSMF") ¶ 1. Capital Health hired Plaintiff as a medical laboratory technician ("lab tech") to work in the microbiology lab at what was then known as the Helene Fuld campus of Capital Health Medical Center, under microbiology lab supervisor Betty Zaslavsky. Marrin Dep. 36:1-2, 60:11-13, 59:9-22; DSMF ¶ 2. Zaslavsky's supervisor was Len Levin, the laboratory director. Marrin Dep. 36:5-7, 59:14-24; DSMF ¶ 3. Levin managed both of Capital Health's laboratories, only one section of which was the microbiology lab. Decl. of Nancy Analore ("Analore Decl."), at ¶ 4; DSMF ¶ 4. Capital Health also employed a laboratory manager, Nancy Analore, to assist Levin in overseeing the hospital's labs. Analore Decl. ¶ 2; DSMF ¶ 5. Levin had previously worked with Plaintiff at another hospital, St. Francis Medical Center, and the two enjoyed a good relationship. Marrin Dep. 36:1-10; DSMF ¶ 6. Levin hired Plaintiff despite the fact that she was not a certified laboratory technician, and "grandfathered" her into the position. Marrin Dep. 30:14-15; DSMF ¶ 7.
In 2010, the microbiology lab moved to a new location in Mercer County. Marrin Dep. 60:15-17; Analore Decl. ¶ 3; DSMF ¶ 8. In early 2010, Zaslavsky went out on medical leave and eventually retired. Analore Decl. ¶ 5; see also Marrin Dep. 64:13-17; DSMF ¶ 9. Capital Health then hired Carolann Bass to assume Zaslavsky's position as the microbiology lab supervisor. Decl. of Carolann Bass ("Bass Decl.") at ¶ 2; see also Marrin Dep. 64:13-24; DSMF ¶ 10. Bass reported for a time to Levin as the lab director, until Capital Health terminated his employment in mid-2012. Analore Decl. ¶ 6; Bass Decl. ¶ 3; DSMF ¶ 11. The position of Lab Director at Capital Health remained unfilled for approximately five months. Analore Decl. ¶ 6; DSMF ¶ 12.
In November 2012, Capital Health named Joan DuVall as the new lab director for the hospital system, and Bass began reporting to DuVall. Bass Decl. ¶5; Decl. of Joan DuVall ("DuVall Decl.") at ¶ 2; see also Marrin Dep. 65:17-66:4; DSMF ¶ 13. Ms. DuVall was officially hired and started work for Capital Health on December 10, 2012. DuVall Dep. Tr. 5:7. This date is critical for the present motions because, although Plaintiff had regularly taken FMLA leave prior to this date and had been subject to disciplinary actions by Capital Health for, inter alia, unsatisfactory work performance, tardiness, and absenteeism, Plaintiff contends that the alleged illegal discrimination, which is the subject of the present motions, began only after DuVall's hiring. Plaintiff's Opposition and Cross Motion, 1 ("The only disciplinary actions and incidents that are relevant are those that occurred after Defendant Joan DuVall was hired in November 2012."). Plaintiff then took an approved FMLA leave from December 13, 2012 through December 23, 2012. Plaintiff's Ex. 14.
In early January 2013, DuVall asked Plaintiff to wear a lab coat instead of the plastic apron that Plaintiff preferred. See Marrin Dep. 227:5-228:13; DSMF ¶ 28. Plaintiff was upset by this incident because she believed that DuVall unnecessarily "yelled" at her after Plaintiff had questioned her immediate supervisor, Bass, whether the plastic apron was no longer appropriate laboratory protective wear, as Plaintiff believed it had been under DuVall and Bass's predecessors. Plaintiff's Counterstatement of Material Facts ("PCSMF" ¶ 28). Subsequently, Plaintiff went on unscheduled PTO on January 7, 8, and 9. Plaintiff's Ex. 14.
On January 16, 2013, Plaintiff and another lab tech engaged in a verbal "dispute" within the microbiology lab. Marrin Dep. 100:5-101:23; DSMF ¶ 30. Plaintiff objects to the characterization of this incident as a dispute, contending that she was only speaking to her coworker to try to resolve "an issue" she perceived the coworker had with Plaintiff, which was leading the coworker to report Plaintiff to DuVall and Bass. Marrin Dep Tr. 101:10-20. It isundisputed, however, that the coworker was upset by this interaction and sought to involve supervisors. Immediately after the incident occurred, Defendants contend that DuVall asked to speak to Plaintiff about the incident while Plaintiff was at her laboratory station. Plaintiff did not speak with DuVall and instead left the building. See id.; DuVall Decl. ¶ 5; DSMF ¶ 31. Plaintiff contends that she left the building for 15 minutes for her morning break and that DuVall never tried to speak with Plaintiff about this incident before Plaintiff received a written disciplinary notification. PCSMF ¶ 31.
Ms. DuVall then directed Ms. Bass to issue a written warning for "inappropriate behavior toward a coworker and job abandonment." Marrin Dep. 132:22-133:17; Disciplinary Action Notice dated 1/16/13, Defendants' Ex. 5; Bass Decl. ¶ 8, Ex. 3; DuVall Decl. ¶ 6; DSMF ¶ 32. This was Plaintiff's fifth written warning in the seven years she had worked for Capital Health. See Ex. 5. Plaintiff refused to sign it. See id. at Disciplinary Action Notice dated 1/16/13; DSMF ¶ 33. Analore asked DuVall to note Plaintiff's attitude on her performance evaluation. See Jan. 2013 Email, Defendants' Ex. 9; DSMF ¶ 34.
Meanwhile, DuVall had observed that the techs in every lab, including Plaintiff, were failing to follow the written attendance and break policies. See Memo dated Jan. 30, 2013, Defendants' Ex. 10; DuVall Decl. ¶ 7; DSMF ¶ 35. In mid-January, Ms. DuVall verbally warned Plaintiff regarding the break policy. Break Periods Policy with J. Marrin Notes, Defendants' Ex. 11; DSMF ¶ 36. DuVall did not explicitly advise any employees of any change in the break policy. PCSMF ¶ 36. Indeed, it is undisputed that Capital Health's official, written break policy was not changed in the period immediately before and after Ms. DuVall's hiring.
Ms. DuVall also issued a memo to all lab staff in late January 2013, Memo dated Jan. 30, 2013, Defendants' Ex. 10, which discussed the Hemolysis policy, the Charge Tech Policy, the Attendance Policy, and the Smoking, Meal, and Breaks Policy. The memorandum emphasizes theneed to comply with those particular policies. Plaintiff categorizes the memorandum as reflecting changes in policy.
On February 4 and 6, 2013, Marrin called out of work by leaving a message regarding her absence on Bass' office voicemail. She did not speak with the tech-in-charge of the lab that she would be out for a period of time, nor did she speak directly with her supervisor, Ms. Bass. See Disciplinary Action Notice dated 2/12/2013, Defendants' Ex. 5; Bass Decl. ¶ 9; DSMF ¶ 38. Calling out by leaving a voicemail violated the call out policy in place in February 2013. See Policies dated Decl. 2006, Jan. 2009, Aug. 2011, and Feb. 2013, Defendants' Ex. 12; DSMF ¶ 42. The same policy had been in place during the entire length of Plaintiff's tenure at Capital Health. Ibid. Plaintiff does not, and cannot, dispute that she violated the written policy by leaving a voicemail, but contends that her calling out did not violate the labs' actual, unwritten policy which had developed as a matter of custom during the seven years in which Plaintiff had worked for Capital Health. Specifically, Plaintiff contends that, to that point, she had called out by leaving voice messages periodically during the seven year length of her tenure, whenever there was not a tech-in-charge or supervisor available to directly take her call. The parties agree that it is important that lab techs properly communicate their absence and how long they expect to be out so that appropriate shift coverage can be arranged. Marrin Dep. 145:17-22; DSMF ¶ 39.
On February 12, 2013, Ms. Bass issued a final written warning for the call out policy violation. See Disciplinary Action Notice dated 2/12/2013, Defendants' Ex. 5; Bass Decl. ¶ 10; DSMF ¶ 40. Plaintiff protested the disciplinary action, claiming that she had called out the same way she always had while working for her previous supervisors, and claiming that she did not know the policy had "changed." Marrin Dep. 136:3-17; DSMF ¶ 41. Plaintiff refused to sign the disciplinary action notice. See Disciplinary Action Notice dated...
To continue reading
Request your trial