Mattingly v. St. John's Hosp. of the Hosp. Sisters of the Third Order of St. Francis

• Decision Date: 17 April 2012
• Docket Number: No. 11-3421,11-3421
• Parties: GERALD W. MATTINGLY, Plaintiff, v. ST. JOHN'S HOSPITAL OF THE HOSPITAL SISTERS OF THE THIRD ORDER OF ST. FRANCIS, an Illinois not-for-profit corporation, Defendant.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Central District of Illinois

GERALD W. MATTINGLY, Plaintiff,

v.ST. JOHN'S HOSPITAL OF THE HOSPITAL SISTERS OF THE THIRD ORDER OF ST. FRANCIS,an Illinois not-for-profit corporation, Defendant.

No. 11-3421

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS SPRINGFIELD DIVISION

ENTER: April 17, 2012

OPINION

SUE E. MYERSCOUGH, United States District Judge.

This cause is before the Court on Defendant St. John Hospital of the Hospital Sisters of the Third Order of St. Francis' Motion to Dismiss Count II of Plaintiff's Complaint (d/e 6). For the reasons that follow, the Motion is GRANTED.

I. FACTS

In November 2011, Plaintiff Gerald W. Mattingly filed a two-count Complaint against Defendant alleging (1) a claim for discriminatory discharge based upon his sex in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-2(a)(Count I); and (2) a request that the Court confirm, pursuant to § 11 of the Uniform Arbitration Act (710 ILCS 5/11), the backpay award made in Plaintiff's favor as a result of the grievance Plaintiff submitted following the termination of his employment (Count II). Plaintiff alleges the following facts in support thereof.

Plaintiff, a male registered nurse, was employed by Defendant for approximately 17 years. For approximately 13 years, Plaintiff worked as an interventional radiology nurse for Defendant.

In June 2009, an incident occurred in the radiology department wherein an elderly patient fell off the x-ray table and died. Plaintiff did not perform or supervise the procedure and was not in the room during the procedure. Nonetheless, Defendant discharged Plaintiff because of the incident.

Plaintiff alleges that Defendant had a written dispute resolution policy that was provided to its employees, a copy of which Plaintiff attached to the Complaint. The "General Policy" section of the Grievance Procedure provided as follows:

[Defendant] makes every effort to prevent conditions which may result in an grievance, and to deal promptly, properly, fairly, objectively and in good faith with the grievances which occur. Eligible employees may utilize the grievance procedure without being subjected to restraint, interference, discrimination, retaliation or harassment of any form provided the procedure is followed in good faith by the employee.

Complaint, Plaintiff's Exhibit A, p. 97. The Procedure defines a grievance as "a complaint or dissatisfaction arising from an application or claimed violation of [Defendant's] policies, rules, or regulations, which may or will result in disciplinary action being taken by [Defendant] which the employee feels is unjust." Complaint, Plaintiff's Exhibit A, p. 97. "Any regular employee may appeal an action which he/she feels is unjust[.]" Complaint, Plaintiff's Exhibit A, p. 98.

According to the Grievance Procedure, an employee must first attempt to resolve the dispute informally. If the employee cannot resolve the issue informally, the employee must then confer with the Human Resources Department representative to "formally define the grievable issue(s), to determine if a grievable situation exists, and to possiblyresolve the matter through mediated discussions." Complaint, Plaintiff's Exhibit A, p. 98.

Once an employee files a formal grievance, the matter proceeds in four steps. In Step One, the grievance is presented to the grievant's Department Director, who reviews and investigates the problem. The employee has five work days to accept the Department Director's determination or appeal the decision to the Division Assistant Administrator.

In Step Two, the Division Assistant Administrator or Division Director reviews the matter and provides a written determination. The grievant may accept the decision or formally appeal the matter to the Fact-Finding Panel (Step Three).

The Fact-Finding Panel consists of (1) "an Administrative Council member from a division other than the grievant's"; (2) "a qualified designee of the manager"; and (3) a qualified designee of the grievant." Complaint, Plaintiff's Exhibit A, p. 100. All panel members must be employees of Defendant and must not have any previous knowledge of orinvolvement in the matter. After the panel makes a recommendation, either party to the dispute may appeal the matter to the Chief Executive Officer (Step Four).

Upon an appeal, the Chief Executive Officer issues a determination. The Grievance Procedure provides that "The decision of the Chief Executive Officer shall be final." Complaint, Plaintiff's Exhibit A, p. 101.

The Grievance Procedure does not allow the employee to be represented by outside sources, stating:

Since the grievance procedure is a process for the internal resolution of employee problems, representation of the employee by outside sources is not permitted. However, the employee may request a fellow employee to assist n the presentation of the grievance.

Plaintiff alleges he followed the Grievance Procedure. At Step Three, the Fact-Finding Panel recommended that Plaintiff's termination from employment be set aside and that he receive a 14-day suspension from employment. Complaint, Plaintiff's Exhibit D (recommendation by the Fact-Finding Panel). The Panel further recommended that Plaintiff be reinstated to his former position and be granted an award of backpay.

The Director of the Department of Radiology appealed the Fact-Finding Panel's recommendation. In October 2009, Defendant's Chief Executive Officer agreed to set aside Plaintiff's termination, reinstate him to employment with Defendant as a critical care nurse in an area other than the Department of Radiology, and granted Plaintiff an award of backpay following a 14-day suspension.

Plaintiff attached to his Complaint the Chief Executive Officer's October 29, 2009 letter to the Director of Radiology. See Complaint, Plaintiff's Exhibit E. Following a listing of the Chief Executive Officer's "final recommendations," the letter provides as follows:

Please consider these recommendations as final and the process for review of [Plaintiff's] grievance complete. Based on a review of the Hospital's Grievance Policy, [Plaintiff] has been granted due process and therefore this matter should be considered closed.

If you have any questions regarding these findings, please let me know. However, these findings are considered final for purposes of the grievance procedure.

Complaint, Plaintiff's Exhibit E. Plaintiff further alleges that despite the Chief Executive Officer's decision, Defendant refused to pay Plaintiff the award of backpay unless Plaintiff signed an agreement containing a general release of all claims held by him against Defendant "arising from any fact, circumstance[,] or event occurring or existing prior to the date of the release." Complaint, ¶ 23.

Plaintiff alleges that as a result of Defendant's refusal to comply with the grievance award in the dispute resolution proceeding described, he has suffered monetary and economic damages. In Count II, Plaintiff seeks, pursuant to § 11 of the Uniform Arbitration Act, that the Court confirm the backpay award made in his favor.

Defendant has filed a Motion to Dismiss Count II pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim.

II. LEGAL STANDARD

A motion to dismiss under Federal Rule Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) permits dismissal of a complaint for "failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted." Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). For purposes of themotion, a court must accept as true all well-pleaded allegations contained in the complaint and draw all inferences in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Estate of Davis v. Wells Fargo Bank, 633 F.3d 529, 533 (7th Cir. 2011). To avoid dismissal for failure to state a claim, the complaint must contain a "short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a). That statement must be sufficient to provide the defendant with "fair notice" of the claim and its basis. Tamayo v. Blagojevich, 526 F.3d 1074, 1083 (7th Cir. 2008); Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007). This means that (1) "the complaint must describe the claim in sufficient detail to give the defendant 'fair notice of what the . . . claim is and the grounds upon which it rests" and (2) its allegations must plausibly suggest that the plaintiff has a right to relief, raising that possibility above a "speculative level." EEOC v. Concentra Health Services, Inc., 496 F.3d 773, 776 (7th Cir. 2007). Conclusory allegations are "not entitled to be assumed true." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 129 S. Ct. 1937, 1951 (2009) (citing Twombly, 550 U.S. at 544-55).

In addition, "[a]ny written instrument attached to the complaint is considered part of the complaint." Moranski v. General Motors Corp., 433 F.3d 537, 539 (7th Cir. 2005) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 10(c)). If the exhibits conflict with the allegations of the complaint, the exhibits generally control. Massey v. Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc., 464 F.3d 642, 645 (7th Cir. 2006).

III. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

This Court has subject matter jurisdiction because Plaintiff's claim in Count I is based on a federal statute. See 28 U.S.C. § 1331. The Court has jurisdiction over Count II, the state law claim, pursuant to its supplemental jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a). Venue is proper because a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred within the judicial district of this Court. See 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(2) (a civil action may be brought in "a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred").

IV. ANALYSIS

In its Motion to Dismiss, Defendant asserts that, while the nature of the claim in Count II is not identified, Plaintiff has (1) failed to state a claim for breach of contract; and (2) failed to allege an enforceable arbitration agreement necessary to establish a claim under § 11 of the Uniform Arbitration Act.

With regard to a potential breach of contract claim, Defendant argues the Employee Handbook, which contained the...