Levitin v. Nw. Cmty. Hosp. — Sept. 2016 (Summary)

TITLE VII

Levitin v. Nw. Cmty. Hosp.
No. 13 C 5553 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 28, 2016)

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois dismissed a lawsuit brought by a physician who claimed that she was subjected to a hostile work environment by the hospital.  The physician filed suit when her clinical privileges were terminated following four levels of internal review.

In her complaint, the physician alleged a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and various state law claims.  Focusing on the Title VII claim, the court sought to determine if the physician could be considered an “employee” under the law.  To determine whether an employment relationship existed, the court examined “the economic realities of the relationship and the degree of control that the employer exercises over the employee.”  Although other courts have determined that a physician who has been granted medical staff appointment and clinical privileges may claim to be an employee for the purposes of alleging discrimination under federal law, the court declined to recognize the existence of an employment relationship in this case.  Although the physician argued that the hospital exercised control over the facilities, equipment, and instruments that she used and dictated the scope of her duties and responsibilities for general surgeries and procedures, the court ruled that the physician’s claims did not “adduce [any actual] evidence to back up her allegations.”

The court found that although the physician was required to follow hospital guidelines, the physician’s “primary authority and fairly wide latitude to determine how best to treat her patients” indicated that she was not an employee of the hospital.  While the court noted that hospitals are required to exercise some measure of physician oversight in the heavily regulated health care market, such as requiring record-keeping, this type of compulsory supervision did not amount to control over the physician’s practice in this case.  In support of its determination, the court indicated that the physician did not receive employment benefits from the hospital (such as vacation days or health insurance) and did not have private office space.  The court also found that the hospital did not pay for her worker’s compensation, malpractice insurance, professional organization dues, licensing fees, or Social Security taxes.

Although the physician received some income from the Physician Hospital Organization, that was not a “sufficient” source of income.  There was no evidence that the hospital compensated her directly other than paying the physician on behalf of the PHO.  Thus, since the physician “largely controlled the means and manner of her delivery of patient services,” the court held that she was not an employee of the hospital and, therefore, could not recover under Title VII.  Accordingly, the court dismissed the physician’s Title VII claims.  The court also decided not to exercise jurisdiction over the physician’s state law claims and dismissed those claims as well.