PHILADELPHIA – After a jury trial, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia has prevailed over an age-based employment discrimination lawsuit filed against it by one of its longtime anesthesiologists.
Dr. Joseph Denham first filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on Feb. 25, 2019 versus the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Children’s Anesthesiology Associates and the Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania.
Denham, a CHOP employee for more than 18 years and over the age of 60, alleged that he faced age-based discrimination after spinal injuries limited his ability to work shifts at the hospital, and the very same discrimination later led him to take a medical leave of absence from his duties.
Starting in 2004, CHOP said it allowed Denham to have an alternate and reduced schedule because of injuries he allegedly sustained in a motor vehicle accident. Further, in 2014, CHOP granted plaintiff permission to further reduce his schedule because of injuries he allegedly sustained in two more motor vehicle accidents.
“In July 2016, Dr. Dean Kurth became CHOP’s Anesthesiology Department Chair. Dr. Kurth met with every doctor in the Department and learned of the multiple alternate arrangements and schedules. In an effort to create fairness, equity, transparency, uniformity, and operational sustainability within the Department, Dr. Kurth introduced the concept of categorizing the doctors into employment models. These models would encompass work schedules and benefits that would allow each doctor to select the model that best suited their overall professional goals while assuring fairness,” according to the hospital’s prior summary judgment motion.
However, Denham did not select an employment model and was the only one of 120 faculty members in the Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care who refused to participate in the process.
He went on a medical leave of absence on after filing his employment discrimination claim through the EEOC on May 22, 2018 and currently remains on long-term disability, with benefits continuing through November 2023.
While counsel for Denham portrayed their client in their pre-trial memorandum last month as a veteran professional who dedicated his life and career to the cause of sick children, CHOP countered in their own pre-trial filing that the plaintiff preferred to keep an “easy position in a non-busy location” in the hospital.
“Plaintiff, a CHOP anesthesiologist with a Penn faculty appointment, has suffered no adverse employment action. He has not been terminated. He has not been demoted. His pay has not been reduced. His assignments at CHOP have not changed in any way. Plaintiff worked a reduced schedule over many years and wanted to continue working his reduced schedule indefinitely, with full benefits,” CHOP’s memorandum stated.
“Plaintiff is slated to continue receiving long-term disability benefits through November 2023 and will have received over $600,000 from Penn and CHOP by that time. Here, plaintiff claims emotional damages only. These damages, if any, are nominal. Simply put, plaintiff has created a fiction with this lawsuit, like the books he spends time writing instead of caring for sick and dying children. By order of this Court dated July 8, 2020, plaintiff’s claims for punitive and liquidated damages were dismissed,” per the hospital’s memorandum.
The hospital’s rationale successfully swayed the jury of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania before Judge Harvey Bartle III, who rendered a verdict in CHOP’s favor on Dec. 7.
The plaintiff was represented by Laura Carlin Mattiacci, Colin Patrick Saltry, Holly W. Smith and Lane Schiff of Console Mattiacci Law, in Philadelphia.
The defendants were represented by Joe H. Tucker Jr. and Leslie Miller Greenspan of Tucker Law Group, also in Philadelphia.
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case 2:19-cv-00794
From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com