Vanhook v. Cooper Health Sys.

• Decision Date: 28 May 2021
• Docket Number: Civ. No. 19-14864
• Parties: MARSHA VANHOOK, Plaintiff, v. THE COOPER HEALTH SYSTEM, Defendant.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey

MARSHA VANHOOK, Plaintiff, v. THE COOPER HEALTH SYSTEM, Defendant.

Civ. No. 19-14864

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

May 28, 2021

Diamond, J.

MEMORANDUM

Marsha VanHook alleges that her former employer Cooper Health System discriminated and retaliated against her because she took leave under the Family Medical Leave Act and because of disabilities suffered by both her and her son. Cooper urges that it fired VanHook after video footage and photographs confirmed that she had repeatedly lied about the reasons she took leave. In responding, VanHook largely ignores this damning evidence, and instead conjures factual disputes respecting Cooper's decision (before it took any punitive action) to investigate her inordinate use of leave. Her arguments are well beside the point. Because the record confirms VanHook's abusive and dishonest actions, I will grant Cooper's Summary Judgment Motion.

I. JURISDICTION

The Court has jurisdiction to hear VanHook's FMLA and Americans with Disabilities Act claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 because they "aris[e] under" the laws of the United States. The Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's state law claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1367.

On May 15, 2020, Chief Judge Smith designated and assigned me to hear this case in the District of New Jersey pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 292(b). (See Doc. No. 17.)

II. SUMMARY JUDGMENT

I may grant a motion for summary judgment when "the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Fed. R. Civ. P. 56. The movant must show that no genuine issue of material fact exists, even where the nonmovant would bear the burden of proof at trial. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986). A dispute is "genuine" if a reasonable jury could find for the nonmoving party. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248 (1986). A fact is "material" only if it "might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law." Id. I must view all facts in the light most favorable to the nonmovant and draw all justifiable inferences in his favor. Prowel v. Wise Business Forms, Inc., 579 F.3d 285, 286 (3d Cir. 2009).

III. BACKGROUND

I have construed the facts and resolved all factual disputes in VanHook's favor. My task has been made more difficult by VanHook's seeming inability to recall innumerable material events. (See, e.g., VanHook Dep. at 11:4-14, 18:19-19:1, 22:7-15, 24:16-20, 26:17-21, 30:12-21, 37:19-38:3, 38:25-39:4, 41:2-5, 43:9-22, 44:1-7, 45:19-24, 46:9-17, 47:4-6, 54:9-13, 55:14-23, 57:20-58:10.)

VanHook, who is 44 years old, began working for Cooper in 2010 as a secretary. (Id. at 13:16-18, 16:13-17.) She was subsequently made a "Professional Services Representative," greeting patients, answering telephone calls, and logging appointments. (Ans., Doc. No. 6, ¶ 28; Def. SUMF ¶¶ 1, 3; Pl. Response to SUMF ¶¶ 1, 3.) She has a 22 year old son who recently served in the Coast Guard, and two nearly grown sons: Michael (17) and Sean (16), who reside with her. (VanHook Dep. at 9:1-15.)

Beginning in 2013, Cooper approved VanHook for "intermittent" FMLA leave to care for Michael, who (according to VanHook) has been diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and oppositional defiant disorder. (Id. ¶¶ 11, 20; Ex. 6 to Mot. for Summary Judgment.) According to VanHook, Michael is prone to aggressive outbursts and must be taken to medicalappointments. (Pl. SUMF ¶ 6.) VanHook testified that after Michael lacerated his wrist during an outburst, he required supervision "at all times of the day." (Id. ¶ 5; VanHook Dep. at 76:5-7; Ex. 6 to Mot. for Summary Judgment.)

In February 2016, supervisor Christine Mueller put VanHook, who was working as a PSR, on an "action plan for improvement," noting that VanHook was insensitive, discourteous, and argumentative in dealing with patients. (VanHook Dep. at 29:10-33:10.) It does not appear that VanHook challenged this action under Cooper's formal grievance process. In September 2016, VanHook had an altercation with a patient. (Id. at 37:1-18.) Although VanHook testified that the patient struck her, Cooper had VanHook "written up" because the patient had complained about her. (Id. at 37:1-18; Ex. EE to Opp'n) ("The patient apparently waived [sic] papers in [VanHook's] face and tapped [her] 3 times on the face with the papers."). Once again, VanHook did not grieve this action. Although VanHook testified that during this six month period in 2016, she had sent well over ten emails complaining that these disciplinary actions constituted "retaliation and harassment," she has produced no such evidence. (VanHook Dep. at 83:3-84:15.) Rather, she offered only a single email from May of 2017 in which she complained about various matters. (Ex. J to Opp'n.)

Although VanHook could remember few of the details, it also appears from her deposition testimony that as a result of the September 2016 face tapping incident, she "was diagnosed with an acute stress disorder." (VanHook Dep. at 36:20-25.) VanHook described herself as experiencing "depression, severe anxiety, panic attacks and related symptoms." She took medical leave from October 2016 through December 2016 after having a "nervous breakdown." (Pl. SUMF ¶¶ 10-11; Def. SUMF ¶ 27; Pl. Response to SUMF ¶ 27.)

Cooper asks every employee intending to take intermittent FMLA leave to inform Human Resources by voicemail on the "FMLA hotline." (Def. SUMF ¶ 12; Pl. Response to SUMF ¶ 12.) HR then informs the employee's manager. (Id. ¶ 13.) When VanHook called the hotline to report intermittent leave, Cooper sometimes requested supporting medical documentation, but never refused any of her many leave requests. (Id. ¶¶ 14, 18.)

After Mueller apparently criticized VanHook's inordinate FMLA leave, VanHook asked to be transferred to another location and department. (Id. ¶ 29.) Once transferred, VanHook fared no better with her new supervisor, Bonnie Mannino. According to VanHook, Mannino "frequently made negative comments regarding VanHook's having taken FMLA leave for herself and her disabled son." (Id. ¶¶ 30-32; Pl. SUMF ¶¶ 13-14.) VanHook hired a lawyer, and "began making complaints of discrimination and harassment against [Mannino]." (Pl. SUMF ¶ 14.) By July 2017—the same month that VanHook began working for Mannino—VanHook's lawyer contacted Cooper regarding Mannino's "harassing, negative and discriminatory comments." (Id.)

On December 27, 2017, Mannino admonished VanHook regarding her ten unscheduled days off between April and December 2017, and her "unprofessionalism" when communicating with another employee and a patient. (Def. SUMF ¶ 36; Pl. Response to SUMF ¶ 36; Ex. 9 to Def.'s Mot. for Summary Judgment; Ex. 10 to Def.'s Mot. for Summary Judgment.) Once again, VanHook signed the associated Disciplinary Action Forms but, again, did not file a grievance under Cooper's formal process. (Def. SUMF ¶¶ 36-37; Pl. Response to SUMF ¶¶ 36-37.)

That same day, Mannino emailed Theresa Sentel, Cooper's "Human Resources Business Partner," noting that VanHook had taken 500 hours of FMLA leave in the past calendar year, when Cooper allowed a maximum of only 480 hours. (Id. ¶ 40; Ex. 11 to Def.'s Mot. for Summary Judgment.) Mannino also testified that she had heard from a coworker that VanHook took theFMLA leave for reasons other than her stated need to care for Michael. (Def. SUMF ¶ 41; Pl. Response to SUMF ¶ 41.) In early 2018, VanHook again complained that Mannino was harassing her regarding her purported abuse of FMLA leave. (Pl. SUMF ¶ 14.)

On January 5, 2018, Cooper employees Sentel, Yvonne Richards, Jennifer Tracy, and Kristen Antonelli Spina exchanged emails regarding VanHook's FMLA leave. Richards wrote to Sentel (copying the others) that VanHook took a full day of FMLA leave after she mistakenly locked the keys inside her car while trying to calm Michael during an outburst and had to wait for a tow truck. (Ex. O to Opp'n.) VanHook took issue with Spina's advice that the time she spent waiting for the tow truck was not allowed under FMLA. (Id.) Richards wrote: "This is very frustrating as this employee is constantly missing work and wants every minute out of work to count as FMLA to care for her child. Can we discuss this further . . . . there has to be something we can do to stop this madness." (Id.) Tracy responded that "this was not the story, it seems to have changed a bit since last week." (Ex. N to Opp'n.) Sentel wrote, "I agree we need to meet to discuss this [and make a] plan of action." (Ex. O to Opp'n.)

At this time, Cooper hired Digistream, a private investigation firm, to surveille VanHook. (Def. SUMF ¶ 44; Pl. Response to SUMF ¶ 44.) Investigators watched VanHook on February 12, February 19, and March 9, 2018—dates on which VanHook had taken FMLA leave to care for Michael. (Def. SUMF ¶ 46; Pl. Response to SUMF ¶ 46.) Their written reports for those days are confirmed by still photographs and exceedingly clear video footage.

On February 12, VanHook texted Mannino that she had to take FMLA leave because Michael was not having "a good day." (Id. ¶ 47.) The investigator watched VanHook that day between 12:30 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. (See Ex. 13 to Def. Mot. for Summary Judgment.) As he reported, at 12:30 p.m., VanHook drove from her house to Voorhees Middle School, where shepicked up Sean. (Id.; Ex. BB to Opp'n.) VanHook then stopped at a Dunkin Donuts drive-through window before returning home. (Ex. 13 to Def. Mot. for Summary Judgment.) At 1:45 p.m., VanHook drove alone to LA Fitness, where she remained until 3:20 p.m., when she went to a Walmart. (Id.) At 3:30 p.m., she left the Walmart and returned home. (Id.) Video and images appended to the report show VanHook waiting at the school, taking out trash, and exercising on a treadmill. (Id.)

VanHook also took FMLA leave on February 19, ostensibly because Michael's school was closed for President's Day and she could not leave...