Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword or section
Like this
2Activity

Table Of Contents

0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
311 Order Msjs

311 Order Msjs

Ratings: (0)|Views: 6,823|Likes:
Published by Eugene D. Lee

More info:

Categories:Types, Research, Law
Published by: Eugene D. Lee on Aug 13, 2009
Copyright:Traditional Copyright: All rights reserved

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

02/06/2013

pdf

text

original

 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
In support of their cross-motions for summary judgment or,
1
in the alternative, partial summary judgment, the parties submitted over 3000 pages of materials
.
1UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURTEASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O.,Plaintiff,v.COUNTY OF KERN; PETER BRYAN (BOTHindividually and in his formercapacity as Chief Executive Of Kern Medical Center); IRWIN HARRIS, M.D.; and DOES 1 through 10,inclusive,Defendants.1:07-CV-00026-OWW-DLB MEMORANDUM DECISION ANDORDER RE DEFENDANTS’ ANDPLAINTIFF’S CROSS-MOTIONSFOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, INTHE ALTERNATIVE, PARTIALSUMMARY JUDGMENTI. INTRODUCTIONBefore the court are cross-motions for summary judgment or, inthe alternative, partial summary judgment, brought by PlaintiffDavid F. Jadwin, D.O. (“Plaintiff”) and, collectively, byDefendants County of Kern (“County”), Peter Bryan (“Bryan”) and Irwin Harris (“Harris”), M.D., on all eleven claims in Plaintiff’sSecond Amended Complaint. The following background facts are takenfrom the parties’ submissions in connection with the motions and other documents on file in this case.
1
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-DLB Document 311 Filed 04/08/2009 Page 1 of 141
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
2II. BACKGROUNDThis case arises out of Plaintiff’s former employment withKern County. Plaintiff worked at the Kern Medical Center (“KMC”),an acute care teaching hospital owned and operated by the County. As of October 2000, Plaintiff, a pathologist, served as the Chairof KMC’s Pathology Department. According to his employmentcontract with the County, his chairmanship was a full-time position. Throughout his employment, while undoubtedly dedicated to his work, Plaintiff engaged in several disagreements and/orconfrontations with his fellow colleagues on a variety of issues.For example, in August 2003, during a conversation with another physician, Plaintiff grabbed the physician’s necktie and pulled him into the hallway. Plaintiff apologized for this incident.Plaintiff’s lawsuit stems from the events surrounding hiseventual removal from his chairmanship position and the non-renewalof his employment contract with the County. The following eventsare central:(1) On July 10, 2006, upon the recommendation of Bryan,KMC’s then Chief Executive Officer, the Joint ConferenceCommittee (“JCC”) voted to remove Plaintiff from hischairmanship. This vote came after Plaintiff had takena medical leave of absence.(2) Subsequently, in light of his removal from thechairmanship, Plaintiff executed an amendment to hisemployment contract which reduced his base salary.(3) After working for the County under this amended agreement, Plaintiff was involuntarily placed on paid administrative leave pending resolution of a personnel
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-DLB Document 311 Filed 04/08/2009 Page 2 of 141
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
3 matter. Plaintiff remained on paid administrative leaveuntil his employment contract expired, and the County did not renew Plaintiff’s employment agreement.Plaintiff attributes these events – his removal from thechairmanship and the associated reduction in salary, hisinvoluntary paid administrative leave, and the non-renewal of hiscontract – to illegal motives which violate several state and federal employment laws. A.The Removal From The Chairmanship And Preceding EventsOn October 24, 2000, Plaintiff signed an employment contract with the County. The term of Plaintiff’s employment was set toexpire on November 30, 2006. On October 5, 2002, Plaintiffexecuted a second employment contract which called for a term ending October 4, 2007. The contract provided that, as a CorePhysician, Plaintiff must perform certain services as set forth inExhibit A. According to Exhibit A, Plaintiff, in his role asPathology Chairman, was expected to serve as the medical directorfor the anatomic pathology service and clinical laboratories atKMC, and report to the KMC Medical Director. Exhibit A explainsthat “[t]his is a full-time position requiring 48 hours of service,on average, per week.” (Doc. 266 at 27.)On October 12, 2005, Plaintiff presented at an intra-hospitalconference called the “Tumor Conference.” According to Plaintiff,his presentation dealt with the medical appropriateness of a proposed radical hysterectomy for a KMC patient. Plaintiff believed the proposed hysterectomy was based on inaccurate pathology reports from outside reviewers and Plaintiff suggested that internal review of such outside work be conducted.
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-DLB Document 311 Filed 04/08/2009 Page 3 of 141

Activity (2)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->