Simpson v. Beaver Dam Cmty. Hosp., Inc. (Summary)

TITLE VII

Simpson v. Beaver Dam Cmty. Hosp., Inc., No. 13-cv-40-bbc (W.D. Wis. May 9, 2014)

The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin granted a motion for summary judgment filed by a not-for-profit organization of integrated healthcare services (the “hospital”) in a suit brought against it by a physician alleging race discrimination under Title VII.

In 2010, the physician, who was African-American, was offered employment in a clinic affiliated with the hospital.  The physician’s employment was dependent upon his attainment and maintenance of medical staff membership and clinical privileges.  During the credentialing process, several “red flags” arose regarding the physician’s application, including his need to take an oral exam to obtain a medical license in the state of Wisconsin, a negative reference describing his disruptive behavior, two medical malpractice claims which were filed when the physician was not insured, and a probationary period during his residency.  To prevent a report to the National Practitioner Data Bank because of the likelihood that his application would be denied, the physician withdrew his application.

Thereafter, the physician sued the hospital, claiming that he was discriminated against because of his race.  The hospital filed a motion for summary judgment, which the court granted.  In ruling on the hospital’s motion for summary judgment, the court determined that the hospital’s concerns regarding the “red flags” were not unreasonable.  For example, the oral exam was a deviation from the normal licensure process and, as such, without evidence pointing towards a lack of sincerity, the hospital was well within its right to consider it.  Further, it was reasonable for the hospital to rely on the negative reference.  Similarly, the hospital was under no obligation to comply with the physician’s request not to contact a former employer who the physician assumed gave the negative reference.  The court also held that the hospital’s employment offers to three Caucasians after the physician withdrew his application could not support the physician’s claims.  None of the Caucasian physicians’ applications contained problems similar to the physician’s application.  As a result, the physician failed to show that the hired physicians were similarly situated.