Ross v. Oceans Behavioral Hospital of Greater New Orleans
165 So. 3d 176
La. Ct. App.2014Background
- Eugenia Ross, an RN at Oceans Behavioral Hospital, reported an alleged patient battery by a mental health technician (reported to administrator and then to corporate compliance). The alleged battery was based on a third-party report (Dorothy Ellis); Ross did not witness it and did not speak to the alleged victim or alleged perpetrator.
- Corporate compliance investigated; both the alleged victim and the alleged perpetrator (Rose Brumfield) denied the incident. Hospital later terminated Ross three days after her corporate compliance report.
- Ross sued under La. R.S. 23:967 claiming retaliatory termination for reporting a workplace act in violation of state law; she sought lost wages and other damages.
- In response to the Hospital’s summary judgment motion, Ross submitted several exhibits (her affidavit, Ellis’s unsigned statement and incident report, investigation notes, and a co-employee affidavit). The Hospital moved to strike those exhibits as inadmissible hearsay and unauthenticated.
- The trial court struck Ross’s affidavits/statements (Exs. 1, 2, 5) and declined to consider Exs. 3 and 4 as unauthenticated hearsay, then granted summary judgment for the Hospital. Ross appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred in striking Ross’s exhibits (affidavits/statements) as hearsay | Ross: Exhibits fall within hearsay exceptions and therefore were admissible for opposing summary judgment | Hospital: Exhibits are inadmissible hearsay, not based on personal knowledge, and unauthenticated | Court: No error — exhibits were inadmissible hearsay and not based on personal knowledge, properly struck |
| Whether summary judgment was improper because a genuine issue exists whether a state-law violation occurred and termination was retaliatory under La. R.S. 23:967 | Ross: If exhibits were considered, a material fact issue would exist as to whether a battery occurred and whether she was fired for reporting it | Hospital: Ross produced no admissible evidence proving an actual violation of state law or causation; moving party met burden to show absence of factual support | Court: No error — Ross offered no competent admissible evidence of an actual statutory violation; summary judgment affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Midland Funding, LLC v. Trahan, 110 So.3d 1154 (La. App. 5 Cir.) (affidavits must be on personal knowledge to oppose summary judgment)
- Tritt v. Gares, 735 So.2d 659 (La. App. 4 Cir.) (personal knowledge requirement for affidavits under summary judgment practice)
- In re Succession of Holbrook, 144 So.3d 845 (La.) (appellate de novo review of summary judgment)
- Muller v. Carrier Corp., 984 So.2d 883 (La. App. 5 Cir.) (substantive law governs propriety of summary judgment)
- Mabry v. Andrus, 34 So.3d 1075 (La. App. 2 Cir.) (employee must prove actual violation of state law, not merely good-faith belief)
- Carter ex rel. Blair v. Bros. Lapalco, 118 So.3d 1194 (La. App. 5 Cir.) (procedural limits on appellate awards when appellee did not appeal)
- DeBaillon v. Consol. Operating Co., 975 So.2d 682 (La. App. 3 Cir.) (similar procedural principle regarding requests not properly before an appellate court)