Robles v. Medisys Health Network, Inc.
| Decision Date | 19 June 2020 |
| Docket Number | 19-cv-6651 (ARR) (RML) |
| Parties | Jose Robles, Plaintiff, v. Medisys Health Network, Inc.; John Does 1-10; and Jane Roes 1-10, Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of New York |
The plaintiff, Jose Robles, brings this action against defendant Medisys Health Network, Inc. d/b/a Jamaica Hospital Medical Center ("the Hospital," "Jamaica Hospital," or "Medisys"), along with ten John Doe and ten Jane Roe defendants. In his First Amended Complaint, the plaintiff alleges claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act, as well as claims under state and local law. The Hospital moves to dismiss the claims asserted against it pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). For the reasons set forth below, the Hospital's motion is granted in part and denied in part.
The plaintiff, Jose Robles, alleges that defendant Medisys operates Jamaica Hospital in Queens, New York. First Am. Compl. ¶ 9, ECF No. 15 ("FAC"). Medisys is a not-for-profit corporation that employs more than fifty people on a full-time or full-time-equivalent basis. Id. ¶¶ 8, 10. Robles worked full time at Jamaica Hospital as a Patient Navigator—responsible for arranging follow-up appointments for patients—from approximately April 2017 until November 5, 2018, when the Hospital fired him. See id. ¶¶ 8-9, 15-18.
Jamaica Hospital also happened to be the local hospital serving Robles's community, and Robles himself received treatment there. See id. ¶ 11. In particular, in May 2018, Robles experienced "mental health related symptoms." Id. ¶ 23. He was hospitalized at Jamaica Hospital for approximately one week and was diagnosed with bipolar disorder. Id. The Hospital granted Robles time off from work so that he could undergo treatment during that week; therefore, Robles believes that the Hospital must have learned of his "medical condition" at that time. Id. ¶ 24.
Notwithstanding his week-long hospitalization in May 2018, Robles remained "able to perform the essential functions of his job, without accommodation" until his mental health symptoms worsened on October 27, 2018. Id. ¶ 21. On that date, the adult daughter of Robles's live-in girlfriend died suddenly in a "domestic violence incident that caused her to suffer a brain aneurism." Id. ¶ 26. This death was traumatic for Robles, and, as a result, he "immediately began to experience severe mental health symptoms associated with depression, anxiety, and bi-polar disorder." Id. ¶ 29. Accordingly, on that same day, he requested leave from work. Id. ¶ 30. He asserts that this leave "qualified as FMLA1 leave[.]" Id. The Hospital granted his request for leave, with Robles scheduled to return to work on November 5, 2018. Id. ¶ 31.
Robles's symptoms continued to worsen during his leave. On November 2, 2018, he attended his girlfriend's daughter's funeral. See id. ¶¶ 32-33. He experienced trauma and grief, which "further exa[cerbated]" his "symptoms." Id. ¶ 33. He became "unable to concentrate" and "had extreme difficulties breathing," and he became Id. ¶ 34. "While [Robles's] symptoms were severely exa[cerbated] by the recent trauma, his underlying conditions were not temporary or a mereimpairment." Id. ¶ 35.
The next day, Robles "suffered a mental breakdown and was found lying in the street." Id. ¶ 36. An ambulance brought him to the emergency room at Jamaica Hospital, where he received treatment "for intoxication, depression, and bipolar disorder." Id. He received medication and stayed in the emergency room overnight, from November 3 until November 4, 2018. Id. ¶ 37.2
During Robles's emergency room stay, his girlfriend also underwent treatment at Jamaica Hospital, for depression. Id. ¶ 38. Robles wanted to see his girlfriend, but a nurse refused to allow him to do so. Id. ¶ 39. Robles then "got into a verbal altercation with" this nurse. Id. ¶ 40.
On November 5, 2018—the day that Robles was scheduled to return to work—a human resources representative for Jamaica Hospital called Robles and told him "that he was terminated from his job 'due to events over the weekend.'" Id. ¶¶ 31, 45. When Robles asked what those events were, the representative responded that "we are not going to discuss that." Id. ¶ 46. Robles believes that the representative "was referencing [his] hospitalization, as no other relevant events occurred during the prior weekend." Id. ¶ 47. Robles told the human resources representative that "his supervisors and co-workers knew that he requested leave because of the exa[cerbation] of his mental health symptoms due [to ]the death of his partner's daughter." Id. ¶ 48. Robles asked tospeak with his supervisors so that he could explain his medical condition and "the events that occurred." Id. ¶ 50. The representative "refused to give [Robles] permission to speak to anyone else regarding his termination, his condition, or events associated with his hospitalization." Id. ¶ 51. Robles "subsequently received a letter from Defendants stating that he would be arrested if he was found on the premises of Jamaica Hospital." Id. ¶ 52.
On the day of his firing, the Hospital knew that Robles had depression and bipolar disorder and that he was "disabled within the meaning of the ADA[.]3" Id. ¶¶ 62-63. However, neither the human resources representative nor any other Hospital representative "attempted to engage with [Robles] to determine if he could be accommodated or to offer him additional FMLA leave." Id. ¶ 53. Nor did the Hospital ever inform Robles of his rights under the ADA or the FMLA. Id. ¶¶ 64-65. If the Hospital had given Robles "a reasonable accommodation of additional leave"—which "would have been a definite period of time"—Robles "would have been able to treat the symptoms of his mental health conditions in a manner that would have enabled him to return to work and perform the essential functions of his job." Id. ¶¶ 54-55. Robles was later—on an unspecified date—"readmitted to Jamaica Hospital for treatment." Id. ¶ 56.
The only way that Robles's supervisors could have learned about his verbal altercation with the nurse would have been by "obtaining his records or being directly informed by staff" members who gave medical care to Robles during his November hospitalization. Id. ¶ 44. Robles alleges this fact based on his belief that "the only potential witnesses" to the altercation were care providers; Robles's supervisors themselves could not have witnessed the altercation, and Robles did not inform his coworkers or any other hospital staff members about it. Id. ¶¶ 41-43. Accordingly, Doe and Roe defendants 1-5 must have "transmitted confidential informationpertaining to [Robles's] treatment for medical and psychiatric conditions" to Doe and Roe defendants 6-10 "for the purpose of, and with the foreseeable consequence of, using that information as grounds for terminating [Robles] from his position as a Patient Navigator at Jamaica Hospital." Id. ¶ 59.
Robles filed his Complaint in this case in November 2019. See Compl., ECF No. 1. After the Hospital requested a pre-motion conference in anticipation of bringing a motion to dismiss, Robles amended the complaint. See Letter, Feb. 3, 2020, ECF No. 10; FAC. The First Amended Complaint asserts eight causes of action. In the first cause of action, Robles alleges that the Hospital discriminated against him, failed to accommodate his disability, and retaliated against him in violation of the ADA and that the Hospital impermissibly engaged in interference, coercion, or intimidation with respect to his ADA-protected rights. See FAC ¶¶ 69-76. In the second cause of action, Robles alleges that the Hospital interfered with the exercise of his rights under the FMLA and retaliated against him for exercising such rights. Id. ¶¶ 77-83. In the third cause of action, Robles alleges that all defendants discriminated and retaliated against him on the basis of his disability in violation of the New York State Human Rights Law. See N.Y. Exec. Law ("NYSHRL") §§ 296(1)(a), 296(7) (McKinney 2020); FAC ¶¶ 84-88. In the fourth cause of action, Robles alleges that the individual Doe and Roe defendants aided and abetted discrimination and retaliation in violation of the NYSHRL. See NYSHRL § 296(6); FAC ¶¶ 89-91. In the fifth cause of action, Robles alleges that all defendants discriminated and retaliated against him in violation of the New York City Administrative Code. See N.Y.C. Admin. Code ("NYCHRL") § 8-107(1)(a) (2020); FAC ¶¶ 92-96. In the sixth cause of action, Robles alleges that the individual Doe and Roe defendants aided and abetted discrimination and retaliation in violation of the NYCHRL. See NYCHRL § 8-107(6); FAC ¶¶ 97-101. In the seventh cause of action, Robles alleges that alldefendants breached their fiduciary duty to maintain the confidentiality of his medical records. FAC ¶¶ 102-05. Finally, in the eighth cause of action, Robles alleges that the Hospital is liable for negligent hiring, training, retention, and/or supervision. See id. ¶¶ 106-11.
The Hospital filed the instant motion to dismiss, seeking to dismiss only those claims asserted against it—and not those asserted against the Doe and Roe defendants—for failure to state a claim pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). See Notice of Mot., ECF No. 22; Mem. of Law in Supp. of Mot. to Dismiss 1 n.1, ECF No. 22-1 ("Def.'s Br."). Thus, the Hospital moves to dismiss the first, second, third, fifth, seventh, and eighth causes of action as asserted against it. Def.'s Br. 1 n.1.
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), a party may move for dismissal for "failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted[.]" Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). In deciding a Rule 12(b)(6...
To continue reading
Request your trial