Sims v. Univ. of Md. Med. Sys. Corp.
Decision Date | 23 June 2022 |
Docket Number | Civil Action CCB-19-295 |
Parties | FARESHA SIMS v. UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND MEDICAL SYSTEM CORPORATION, et al. |
Court | U.S. District Court — District of Maryland |
This employment discrimination action involves a dispute between Dr. Faresha Sims and her former employer, the University of Maryland Medical Center (“Medical Center”). Dr Sims, a certified registered nurse anesthetist (“CRNA”), contends the Medical Center and her former supervisors, Linda Goetz and Lisa Rowen (collectively “the defendants”), racially discriminated against her in several ways. Dr. Sims, who is representing herself alleges Ms. Goetz refused to hire Dr. Sims into her preferred department, targeted Dr. Sims with a racially motivated drug test, and retaliated against her for filing a racial discrimination complaint. She also alleges the defendants falsely regarded her as psychotic in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. These incidents, according to Dr. Sims, were cultivated in the larger context of a hostile work environment.
Now pending before the court is the defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. The issues have been fully briefed, with Dr. Sims filing an Opposition (ECF 170, Pl.'s Opp.'n Summ. J.), and the defendants filing a Reply The motion is ripe for disposition, and no hearing is necessary. Local Rule 105.6 (D. Md. 2021). For the reasons set forth below, the court will grant the defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment on all counts.
BACKGROUND[1]
The University of Maryland Medical Center (“Medical Center”) offers a variety of health care services for the residents of Baltimore and beyond. Every year, thousands of patients visit the Medical Center seeking critical medical assistance. (Id. at ¶ 9.) In the past, patients may have experienced significant amounts of pain during these procedures. But thanks to decades of scientific research, medical experts have found ways to alleviate discomfort during operations. To that end, the Medical Center's Anesthesia Department administers drugs that induce a patient's temporary loss of sensation or awareness during surgery. (Id. at ¶ 8.) Certified registered nurse anesthetists (“CRNAs”) play an integral role in the Medical Center's Anesthesia Department. These highly-skilled medical professionals evaluate patients before surgery, collaborate with the surgical team, administer anesthesia, and monitor patients' recovery. .)
In the early months of 2012, Dr. Faresha Sims was studying to become a CRNA. (See ECF 172-1, Pl.'s Ex. 12 at ¶ 990.) When Dr. Sims began thinking about post-graduation employment, she became interested in the Medical Center's Anesthesia Department. (Id.) On March 5, 2012, she sent her resume to Ms. Linda Goetz, the Director of Nurse Anesthetists at the Medical Center. (Id.) A few months later, on June 5, 2012, Ms. Goetz interviewed Dr. Sims for a CRNA position.
During the application process, Dr. Sims expressed a specific interest in the Medical Center's Shock Trauma Center. The Medical Center's Anesthesia Department is separated into two divisions: the General Operating Room (“GOR”) and the Shock Trauma Center (“STC”). As the names suggest, CRNAs assigned to the GOR provide anesthetic support for a wide-variety of medical procedures, while those assigned to the STC specialize in treating trauma-related injuries.
On July 19,2012, Ms. Goetz offered Dr. Sims a position in the GOR. Dr. Sims's offer letter required her to pass the national board examination for CRNAs within 60 days of completing her degree. .) Dr. Sims failed her first attempt at the board exam by two points. (ECF 177-6, Pl.'s Ex. 67; ECF 159-16, Goetz Decl. ¶ 17.) Ms. Goetz allegedly scolded Dr. Sims after learning of her unsuccessful attempt. During this tense . conversation, Ms. Goetz allegedly threatened to revoke Dr. Sims's employment offer based on her exam performance. (Id.) Ms. Goetz ultimately held open Dr. Sims's position so she could re-take the test. (ECF 159-16, Goetz Decl. ¶¶ 17-18.) After Dr. Sims passed the examination on her second attempt (Sims Dep. 332:4-14.), Ms. Goetz permitted Dr. Sims to begin working in the GOR on April 8, 2013. ' .) .
The conflict regarding Dr. Sims's board exam foreshadowed the ebbs and flows in her relationship with Ms. Goetz. (See Sims Dep. 106:20-21.) On the one hand, Ms. Goetz allegedly told Dr. Sims she was making “stupid” Declsions (id. at 233:8-25), said Dr. Sims was “argumentative and aggressive like the average black woman” (ECF 180-5, Sims Decl. ¶ 16), and even kicked her in a bout of frustration within the first three months of her orientation (Sims Dep. 101:23-103:17). But in other instances, Ms. Goetz showered Dr. Sims with praise and public' displays of gratitude. Ms. Goetz, who supervises all CRNAs at the Medical Center, nominated Dr. Sims for several awards. , .) In August 2014, Ms. Goetz awarded Dr. Sims the Medical Center's “highest honor and award offered to an employee.” , Ms. Goetz explained her nomination in a selection memorandum:
.) Ms. Goetz had given this award only one other time in her fourteen-year career at the Medical Center. (ECF 159-16, Goetz Decl. ¶ 16.)
On February 9, 2015, after working at the Medical Center for over a year, Dr. Sims asked Ms. Goetz for an update on the STC's hiring plans. (ECF 180-5, Sims Decl. ¶ 12.) Ms. Goetz confirmed Dr. Sims was “still on the list,” while promising that she “would let [Dr. Sims] know as soon as [her] turn came.” (Id.} Meanwhile, Ms. Goetz cross-trained and hired two non-black CRNAs from the GOR into the STC during Dr. Sims's tenure at the Medical Center. (ECF 172-3, Pl.'s Ex. 14.)
In May 2015, multiple employees at the Medical Center began expressing concerns about Dr. Sims's behavior at work. Some noted she had recently become confrontational and aggressive toward her colleagues. Others complained that Dr. Sims had become “explosive” and even “offensive.” .) Several more noted that she refused to leam the names of residents, despite working together on multiple occasions, and would occasionally refer to residents as “almost doctors.”, Dr. Sims's direct manager, Wanda Walker-Hodges, spoke with Dr. Sims about these complaints and discussed the importance of self-control and professionalism in the workplace. (ECF 180-2, Pl.'s Ex. 93 at ¶ 5877.) Dr. Sims received a corrective action verbal warning for her misconduct. . .)
Many complaints noted this behavior from Dr. Sims was a recent phenomenon. One attending physician, for example, explained to Ms. Goetz that Dr. Sims looked “burnt out,” “tired,” and ultimately was “not the same Faresha that she was last year.” Dr. Sims's interpersonal difficulties with her coworkers were accompanied by multiple instances where Dr. Sims refused to leave work at the end of her shift. (Id. at UMMC421-22; ECF 159-14, Defs.' Ex. 12 at 4.) Dr. Sims's superiors had noticed and expressed concern about her significant change in behavior during this time.
On June 18, 2015, Ms. Goetz shared these concerns with Dr. Peter Rock, the chair of the Anesthesiology Department. , Although Ms. Goetz possessed no actual knowledge that Dr. Sims had a drag abuse problem (ECF 180, Goetz Dep. 181:8-182:9), Dr. Rock and Ms. Goetz noted that Dr. Sims's behavior matched signs of substance abuse. (ECF 159-15, Defs.' Ex. 13 at 9.) According to research by the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists, behaviors suggesting possible substance abuse include mood swings; outbursts of anger, aggression, and hostility; and refusing to be relieved at the end of one's shift, .)
Ms. Goetz turned to the Medical Center's Fitness for Duty Policy for guidance. The policy provides a specific set of guidelines for supervisors when dealing with an employee who they suspect may be unfit for duty. A supervisor may require an employee to report to Employee Health Services for a “fitness for duty” (“FFD”) evaluation if the employee “exhibits behaviors which indicate that the person may be unable to perform their job duties in a safe and effective manner.” (Id. at UMMC7-8.)
A fitness for duty evaluation includes an interview, a physical examination, a drug test, and an evaluation by...
To continue reading
Request your trial