Wis. Province of the Society of Jesus v. Cassem
| Decision Date | 14 September 2020 |
| Docket Number | No. 3:17-cv-01477 (VLB),3:17-cv-01477 (VLB) |
| Citation | 486 F.Supp.3d 527 |
| Parties | WISCONSIN PROVINCE OF the SOCIETY OF JESUS, Plaintiff, v. Audrey V. CASSEM, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Connecticut |
Edward J. Heath, Christopher John Hug, Robinson & Cole, Hartford, CT, Gregory J. Bennici, Robinson & Cole LLP, Stamford, CT, for Plaintiff.
Kevin J. Greene, Halloran & Sage LLP, Hartford, CT, Peter S. Gersten, Gersten Law Offices, LLC, West Hartford, CT, for Defendants Audrey F. Cassem, Thomas F. Owens, II.
Charles Donald Neville, Kroll McNamara Evans & Delahanty, West Hartford, CT, for Defendant Neil Kraner.
Before the Court is Defendants Audrey Cassem and Thomas F. Owens's ("Defendants") Motion for Summary Judgment [Dkt. 135] in the case brought by Wisconsin Province of the Society of Jesus ("Plaintiff" or the "Province") over the late Rev. Edwin H. "Ned" Cassem, M.D., S.J.’s ("Fr. Cassem") designation of the Defendants as the beneficiaries of two ERISA-qualified retirement accounts. See generally , [Dkt. 44 (Am. Compl.)].1 The Province alleges that Fr. Cassem's January 11, 2011 beneficiary designation is invalid due to incapacity or undue influence. [Id. at ¶¶ 39-48]. The Defendants move for summary judgment arguing that Plaintiff cannot present enough admissible evidence showing a genuine dispute as to Fr. Cassem's capacity or whether he was subject to undue influence and that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part the Defendants’ motion for summary judgment.
Before discussing the background of this matter, the Court makes an observation. The task before the Court is formidable, requiring the objective inquiry into Fr. Cassem's mind on one day, nearly a decade ago. The litigation pits the religious order that Fr. Cassem belonged to for sixty years against his late brother's widow and her son. It is a difficult case but ultimately one that the Court must resolve because it is within the Court's jurisdiction.2 If Fr. Cassem had the requisite mental capacity to execute the beneficiary designation and it was a product of his free will, his reasoning for doing so is immaterial.
The following facts are taken from the Local Rule 56 statements of material facts and evidence cited by the parties. For ease of reference, exhibits will refer to evidentiary exhibits included with the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment [Dkts. 136-1 (Def. Exs. 1-9), 136-2 (Def. Exs. A-G), and Dkt. 136-3 (Def. Exs. H-L)] and Plaintiff's Opposition [Dkt. 150] by exhibit identification only, i.e. [Def. Ex. A] and [Pl. Ex. 1]. Citation to the Defendants’ D. Conn. Civ. L. R. 56(a) statement is applicable only where the parties agree as to the fact stated.3
Fr. Cassem was a Jesuit-member of the Province. [Def. D. Conn. Civ. L. R. 56(a) statement ¶ 2]; [Pl. Ex. 2 (N. Cassem Final Vows in English, 12/26/1985)].4 He was an esteemed psychiatrist practicing at Massachusetts General Hospital ("MGH"), where he served as the Chief of the Psychiatry Department for over a decade. [Def. D. Conn. Civ. L. R. 56(a) statement ¶ 3]; [Pl. Ex. 5 (Province Death Announcement, 07/07/2015)]. In addition to his clinical work, he was a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School. [Id. ].
Fr. Cassem acquired two retirement accounts in his capacities as a psychiatrist and professor. [Def. D. Conn. Civ. L. R. 56(a) statement ¶ 3]; see also [Dkt. 51 (Answer of TIAA CREF) ¶¶ 64-65]. Fr. Cassem executed a beneficiary designation in 1976 naming the Province as the recipient of the retirement accounts. [Def. D. Conn. Civ. L. R. 56(a) statement ¶ 3]; [Pl. Ex. 12 (TIAA beneficiary form, 08/25/1976)]. While practicing medicine and teaching, Fr. Cassem resided at the Jesuit community in Weston, Massachusetts until Christmas of 2011. [Pl. Def. D. Conn. Civ. L. R. 56(a)2(ii) statement ¶ 10].
The Province presents evidence showing that the scope of Fr. Cassem's medical practice was curtailed by MGH out of concern over his judgment. Gregory Fricchione, M.D., who was then Chief of the Psychiatry Department, testified that he observed Fr. Cassem act "inappropriately" at a fellowship dinner after becoming intoxicated, sometime in 2008 or 2009. . The incident caused Dr. Fricchione to initiate a peer review investigation into Fr. Cassem's fitness to continue to practice medicine at MGH. . Dr. Fricchione testified that before a clinician's medical privileges are revoked, MGH gives physicians the opportunity to voluntarily relinquish their privileges. . While expressing admiration for Fr. Cassem, Dr. Fricchione also testified that he became "coarser" and "caustic." . As the peer review process concluded or was coming to a conclusion, Dr. Fricchione was tasked with suggesting that Fr. Cassem, his former mentor, relinquish his medical privileges at MGH. [Pl. Ex. 7 (Fricchione Depo.) at 146:11-147:24]. Eventually, Fr. Cassem agreed and his privileges were reduced to either "Honorary Staff" or "Courtesy Staff," meaning that he could no longer admit patients or prescribe medications at MGH. ( that Fr. Cassem remained employed after the peer review proceeding); [Pl. Ex. 24-25, MGH Prof. Staff Bylaws §§ 2.03.3, 2.03.09].
The parties disagree over the scope of Fr. Cassem's clinical or teaching duties at MGH from 2010 through Christmas of 2011. [Def. D. Conn. Civ. L. R. 56(a) statement ¶ 6]. The parties agree that Fr. Cassem was "present" at MGH in 2010 and periods of 2011 and the Province did not refute Defendant's assertion that Fr. Cassem maintained at least a mentorship and physician training role. [Def. D. Conn. Civ. L. R. 56(a) statement ¶ 6]. The Province's financial records show that Fr. Cassem's monthly salary remittance to the Jesuits decreased from $10,906 in September 2010 to $2,444 in October 2010. [Pl. Ex. 14 (Cassem Income and Expenses spreadsheet)].
Barbara McManus, Fr. Cassem's administrative assistance since the 1990's, testified that he worked, "pretty much full days" and assisted with overflow calls, training new physicians, and taking calls from colleagues. . The Defendants argue that Fr. Cassem "also maintained a small private practice during this period," but Ms. McManus's cited deposition testimony makes no reference to Fr. Cassem continuing to maintain a small private practice. [Def. D. Conn. Civ. L. R. 56(a) statement ¶ 6] . However, Defendant's Exhibit 6 is a January 18, 2011 letter from Ms. McManus to an insurance intermediary stating that
The Defendants do not explain the scope of Fr. Cassem's clinical or mentoring activities after his privileges were reduced in 2010. The insurance coverage application is not necessarily indicative of whether Fr. Cassem continued to practice psychiatry because the scope of his clinical duties is unknown, although he stated in the application that he only saw patients occasionally. The Defendants do not establish that such coverage was ever placed and whether the coverage was intended to address future clinical encounters or whether it was "tail" coverage for claims arising prior to the termination of his privileges. The parties agree, however, that Fr. Cassem's functional relationship at MGH ended over Christmas 2011 once he relocated to Audrey Cassem's home in West Hartford, Connecticut. [Def. D. Conn. Civ. L. R. 56(a) statement ¶ 6]. Fr. Cassem formally remained on MGH's medical staff until February 2012, over a year after the beneficiary designation change. [Pl. Ex. 4 (A. Cassem Depo.) at 27:01-27:13]; [Pl. Ex. 37 (Fr. Cassem Retirement Ltr., 02/06/2012)].
Medical records memorialize that Fr. Cassem was evaluated by MGH neurologists in January 2000 and again in October 2001 because of behavioral changes, including, increased irritability, forgetfulness, disorganization, disinhibition and hypomanic symptoms, although the original records from these baseline assessments are either no longer available or are not presented by the parties. [Pl. Ex. 19 (Neuropsychology Reevaluation, 05/25/2010)].
In 2008, Fr. Cassem began taking Fluoxentine. [Pl. Ex. 26 (Walgreens Data)]. The Province argues that he was taking the medication without a documented diagnosis of depression or anxiety, however, they do not cite evidence showing the absence of a diagnosis or suggesting that Fr. Cassem was self-medicating. Of note, the pharmacy data shows that the prescription was issue by G. Murray of MGH, which appears to refer to Fr. George Murray, who was also a Jesuit and a psychiatrist. See (referencing Fr. Murray).
In 2009, Fr. Cassem was involved in a car accident. [Pl. D. Conn. Civ. L. R. 56(a)(2)(ii) ¶ 55]. Two women who were suing Fr. Cassem over injuries related to the accident sent a letter to Mrs. Cassem and several Jesuits upon learning of his death, claiming that he admitted that he fell asleep while driving. [Pl. Ex. 26 ]. The Province offers no evidence corroborating the circumstances or the severity of any purported automobile accident. The Defendant's reply brief states that this litigation ended in a defense verdict but does...
To continue reading
Request your trial