Judicial Watch Files a Lawsuit To Protect The Right of Teacher Jeanne Hedgepeth To Speak Out on Facebook Criticizing Chicago Riots

Palatine High School | Township High School District 211

This case will provide guidelines for teachers on speaking out as private citizens on matters of public concern. Kudos to Judicial Watch! 

Betsy Combier
betsy.combier@gmail.com
Editor, Advocatz.com
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials

Judicial Watch Files Civil Rights Lawsuit for High School Teacher Fired for Facebook Posts Criticizing Chicago Riots, Looting, and Violence in the Aftermath of George Floyd Killing

Press Release

Judicial Watch announced today that it has filed a federal civil rights lawsuit on behalf of Palatine, Illinois tenured high school teacher Jeanne Hedgepeth, who was fired by the suburban-Chicago school district where she had worked for 20 years after posting comments on Facebook criticizing the riots, violence, and shootings in Chicago in the aftermath of the May 25, 2020, killing of George Floyd. Hedgepeth made the posts on her personal Facebook page while vacationing after the end of the school year, just as some of the most severe violence was occurring. In her posts, Hedgepeth recommended studying Thomas Sowell, whom she described as a “treasure” and a “truth seeker,” and praised political commentator and activist Candice Owens and talk show host Larry Elder. She alleges that the firing violated her First Amendment rights.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, seeks damages from the school district, Township High School District 211, and district board members and officials who participated directly in the firing (Hedgepeth v. Britton et al. (Case No. 1:21-cv-03890)).

The lawsuit explains:

In late May and early June 2020, Hedgepeth was vacationing in Florida after the end of the 2019-20 school year when violent street protests, rioting, looting, and shootings erupted in Chicago and many other U.S. cities in the aftermath of the killing of George Floyd on May 25, 2020 by Minneapolis police officers. In Chicago alone, 82 persons were shot, 19 fatally, over the May 30-31, 2020 weekend. On May 31, 2020, which the Chicago SunTimes described as the most violent day Chicago had seen in 60 years, Mayor Lori Lightfoot asked Governor J.B. Pritzker to deploy the Illinois National Guard in the city.

That same day, May 31, 2020, Hedgepeth posted the following photos of herself on the beach in Florida along with the comment, “I don’t want to go home tomorrow. Now that the civil war has begun I want to move.”

An individual responded, “Follow your gut! Move!!!!!!!!!” Hedgepeth answered, “I need a gun and training.” The individual replied, “me too!”

Another individual posted a meme that same day suggesting that the riots could be stopped with a septic tank truck and a pressure cannon. Hedgepeth reposted the meme, obviously in jest, adding, “You think this would work?”

On or about June 1, 2020, Hedgepeth posted the following comment on Facebook in the course of an exchange of posts begun the previous day with a third individual:

I am about facts, truth seeking and love. I will speak on any topic I choose because I live in a free country. I find the term “white privilege” as racist as the “N” word. You have not walked in my shoes either so do not make assumptions about me and my so called privilege. You think America is racist? Then you have been hoodwinked by the white liberal establishment and race baiters like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. Travel the world and go see that every nation has racism and some more than others but few make efforts such as we do to mitigate or eliminate it. I have lived and seen. The people I am informed by about the black experience in America are actually some of the smartest people in America. And it so happens they are black. I highly recommend studying Thomas Sowell, who is now retired and in his 80’s. A treasure. A truth seeker. [D]oes REAL research and analysis. Candice Owens is one of the smartest and most courageous women in America and Larry Elders speaks the truth with a great sense of humor and FACTS not feelings. They are who I listen to when it comes to facts about the black experience in America. Don’t you think there is a deeper problem than racism when 50% of murders in America are committed by 13% of the population? Do you think there might be a subtle genocide of black babies when most planned parenthoods are put in poor neighborhoods and that 30% of abortions are black babies. [B]lack women only make up 7% of the U.S. population. The greatest power you have is what you believe about yourself. [W]hat have Democrats, mainstream media and intellectuals in ivory towers been telling the black community to believe about themselves for forty years? Wake up and stop believing them, then things will change.

All of Hedgepeth’s posts were on her personal Facebook page. None of Hedgepeth’s posts identified her as a teacher or a District 211 employee, nor did Hedgepeth post them in her capacity as a teacher or a District 211 employee. None of the persons with whom Hedgepeth exchanged Facebook posts were current District 211 or Palatine High School teachers, staff, or students.

Upon returning from her vacation in early June 2020, Hedgepeth learned that the school district was investigating her for her Facebook posts. She was fired by the school board six weeks later, on July 16, 2020, by a vote of 5-2. In her defense, Hedgepeth noted that the posts were on her personal Facebook page and were made “out of school.” She also expressly invoked her First Amendment rights.

“The school district took what could have been a teachable moment about respecting diversity of viewpoints and turned it into a clear civil rights violation,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Jeanne Hedgepeth had every right to express herself freely and openly on her personal Facebook page, outside of school, about matters of undeniable public concern. Firing her for opposing lawlessness, speaking out about gun rights, praising black conservatives, and criticizing Democrats and tenets of Critical Racial Theory violated the First Amendment, and the school district and district officials who did so will be held accountable.”

Judicial Watch is being assisted by attorney Christine Svenson of Palatine, Illinois.

See also:

Former Palatine High School Teacher Files Federal Lawsuit

Ex-Palatine H.S. teacher fired for anti-riot, anti-BLM Facebook posts files First Amendment suit vs District 211, school board members

By Jonathan Bilyk, July 21, 2021

A former Palatine High School teacher who was fired in the summer of 2020 over her Facebook posts critical of riots and looting that erupted in Chicago amid protests led by the Black Lives Matter movement, has sued the Palatine school district that formerly employed her, saying the district trampled on her First Amendment speech rights.

Named defendants include Township High School District 211, and individual defendants including those sitting on the District 211 school board in July 2020 and the district’s superintendent and human resources director.

The suit comes as Hedgepeth also continues to pursue a separate defamation lawsuit in Cook County court against current District 211 board member and Black Lives Matter activist Tim McGowan.

Both cases center around Hedgepeth’s termination in July 2020 from the teaching job she had held at Palatine High School for 20 years.

According to the new federal complaint, Hedgepeth was vacationing in Florida in late May 2020 when rioters and looters inflicted hundreds of millions of dollars in damage on Chicago’s central business district and other major corridors in the city. The riots broke out amid widespread protests against racism, triggered by the death of George Floyd at the hands of police in Minneapolis earlier that month.

According to the complaint, Hedgepeth then posted photos, memes and other comments critical of the looting and rioting.

For instance, she posted photos of herself on a beach in Florida, captioned: “I don’t want to go home tomorrow. Now that the civil war has begun I want to move.”

She also reposted a meme, created by someone else, saying authorities seeking to stop rioters should “mobilize the septic trucks, put a pressure cannon on em… hose em down… the end.” Hedgepeth added the comment: “You think this would work?”

In June, Hedgepeth added more in-depth comments on Facebook, as part of a discussion.

Those said, in part:

“I find the term ‘white privilege’ as racist as the ‘N’ word. You have not walked in my shoes either so do not make assumptions about me and my so-called privilege. You think America is racist? Then you have been hoodwinked by the white liberal establishment and race-baiters like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. Travel the world and go see that every nation has racism and some more than others but few make efforts such as we do to mitigate or eliminate it.”

She added: “Don’t you think there is a deeper problem than racism when 50% of murders in America are committed by 13% of the population? Do you think there might be a subtle genocide of black babies when most planned parenthoods are put in poor neighborhoods and that 30% of abortions are black babies. [B]lack women only make up 7% of the U.S. population. The greatest power you have is what you believe about yourself. [W]hat have Democrats, mainstream media and intellectuals in ivory towers been telling the black community to believe about themselves for forty years? Wake up and stop believing them, then things will change.”

The complaint noted all of Hedgepeth’s comments were on her personal Facebook page, and she did not identify herself as a teacher or employee of Palatine High School District 211. Further, none of the people she engaged with in those posts were District 211 students or employees.

However, the complaint said Hedgepeth was immediately placed under investigation by the school district, and was fired by the school board about one month later, with the school board citing her Facebook posts as justification.

In her defamation lawsuit against McGowan, Hedgepeth accused McGowan of falsely smearing her as a racist, and then orchestrating a campaign against her that resulted in her termination. McGowan had organized “anti-racism” protests in Palatine in the summer of 2020 under the banner of BLM.

He posted a video to Facebook in which he laid out accusations of racism against Hedgepeth.

McGowan was elected to the District 211 school board in November 2020, thanks to support from the District 211 teachers union.

A Cook County judge refused McGowan’s attempt to dismiss Hedgepeth’s lawsuit, and the case remains pending.

In her federal lawsuit against the District 211 board, Hedgepeth asserts the board’s decision to fire her over personal Facebook posts amounts to a violation of her First Amendment free speech rights.

Hedgepeth’s “protected speech was a substantial or motivating factor in (District 211’s) decision to terminate Plaintiff’s employment, and, but for Plaintiff’s protected speech, Defendants would not have terminated Plaintiff’s employment,” Hedgepeth’s lawsuit asserts.

The lawsuit seeks unspecified compensatory damages from District 2011 and punitive damages against District 211 human resources director James A. Britton; District 211 school board members Kimberly Cavill, Anna Klimkowicz, Robert J. Lefevre Jr., Edward M. Yung and Steven Rosenblum; and District 211 Superintendent Lisa A. Small.

Hedgepeth is represented in the federal action by attorneys Paul J. Orfanedes, of Judicial Watch, of Washington, D.C., and Christine Svenson, of Svenson Law Offices, of Palatine.

She is represented in the Cook County defamation case by attorney Joel F. Handler, of the Handler Law Group, of Chicago.

Religion and Politics: An Unmarried Teacher at a New Jersey School Is Fired, Then Sues

Victoria Crisitello

The big picture here is, separation of church and state, religion and politics:

where do you draw the line?

Victoria Crisitello, an art teacher at a Catholic school in New Jersey, became pregnant but was not married. The principal, a Roman Catholic nun, told her she was being fired because she was "pregnant and unmarried".

Rita Schwartz, president of the National Association of Catholic School Teachers, is quoted as saying,

 "“The church is supposed to hate the sin, but not hate the sinner,” Ms. Schwartz said. “They should be very happy that she’s not having an abortion. Don’t you think?”

“It should have been handled with love,” she added. “The whole thing in our religion is not fear. It’s not firing. It’s love. She needs help here. She needs people to work with her, and that’s what they’re supposed to be doing — not ‘Off with her head.’”

Here is Ms. Crisitello's Petition to the N.J. Supreme Court

Betsy Combier

betsy.combier@gmail.com

Editor, ADVOCATZ.com
Editor, ADVOCATZ blog
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials

An Unmarried Catholic Schoolteacher Got Pregnant. She Was Fired.

A lawsuit that she filed in New Jersey is testing the First Amendment limits of religious freedom.

By Tracey Tully, NY TIMES, June 28, 2021

When a Catholic school art teacher was asked to take on extra responsibilities, she requested a raise, explaining that she was about to have a baby.

Weeks later, she was fired from her New Jersey elementary school. The principal, a Roman Catholic nun, told her she was being terminated “because she was pregnant and unmarried,” court records show.

The woman sued. Her daughter is now 7, but the lawsuit remains in limbo, caught in a yearslong back-and-forth between New Jersey’s trial and appellate courts.

An appeals court has twice sided with the ex-teacher, Victoria Crisitello. But last month, the state’s highest court, acting on an appeal by the school, agreed to hear the case, signaling a willingness to wade into the highly charged debate over the relationship between the government and religion.

Its decision comes less than a year after the United States Supreme Court upheld the rights of church-run schools to terminate lay teachers, one of a string of recent decisions by a court far more likely to rule in favor of religious rights than not.

The archdiocese that oversees the New Jersey school, St. Theresa in Kenilworth, has framed its legal argument as a must-win fight for the “fundamental freedom of religion.”

“Sex out of wedlock violates a fundamental Catholic belief that the school in this instance felt it could not overlook,” lawyers for St. Theresa’s wrote in a petition to the state Supreme Court.

Ms. Crisitello’s lawyer, Thomas A. McKinney, says the case is as much about gender discrimination and sexual double standards as it is about First Amendment rights.

The principal acknowledged in depositions that she made no effort to determine if other staff members, including men, were engaged in extramarital sex, court records show.

Because the school’s only proof of a violation of its morals code was the pregnancy itself, “only a woman could be punished, not a man,” Mr. McKinney said.

“If you’re going to punish someone for doing something,” he said, “it has to be applied equally and evenly.”

Ms. Crisitello, who attended St. Theresa School as a child, was fired in 2014 and no longer works as a teacher. Her daughter was later baptized in the Catholic church that runs the prekindergarten-to eighth-grade school.

Ms. Crisitello, through her lawyer, declined to comment. School officials did not return a call for comment.

“I don’t think she expected any of this,” Mr. McKinney said. “I don’t look at this as an attack on the Catholic Church.”

Last July, the Supreme Court ruled that federal employment discrimination laws do not apply to teachers at church-run schools whose duties include religious instruction. In doing so, it expanded the scope of employees deemed outside the reach of employment discrimination protections — known as the “ministerial exception” to workplace bias laws.

It is no longer only trained or ordained ministers and religious leaders who may be excluded from work bias protections; the federal court ruled that lay employees involved in promoting church doctrine were also exempt from federal employment discrimination laws.

The broadened definition could arguably be applied to nearly any employee of a religious school, significantly altering job protections, even in a state like New Jersey, where workers have traditionally enjoyed strong legal safeguards, said Stacy Hawkins, a Rutgers Law School professor who teaches employment law.

Ms. Crisitello’s lawsuit was twice tossed out by trial court judges, only to be restored each time on appeal.

Her lawyer, seeking to differentiate the case from the Supreme Court decision that expanded the ministerial exception — Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru — stressed that Ms. Crisitello taught art, not religion. She was first hired as an aide in a preschool classroom, he said, and had never taught religion.

New Jersey’s appellate court, citing legal precedent, found there was evidence the school had not attempted to enforce its morals code equally, invoking in its ruling characters from Nathaniel Hawthorne’s “The Scarlet Letter.”

“While a religious school employer may validly seek to impose moral doctrine upon its teaching staff, punishment singularly directed at the Hester Prynnes, without regard to the Arthur Dimmesdales, is not permissible,” the judges quoted.

The appellate judges published the opinion, making it the guiding legal standard in New Jersey unless overturned. That has increased the urgency of the case for the Archdiocese of Newark.

“This case affects the fundamental freedom of religion not only for the Catholic Church and its institutions, but also for the operations of other religious organizations,” a spokeswoman for the archdiocese, Maria Margiotta, said in a statement. “Potentially, all religious organizations, including all Catholic schools in the archdiocese, are impacted.”

The school also brought on an additional lawyer, Peter G. Verniero, a former state attorney general and state Supreme Court judge.

Mr. Verniero said the school’s successful request for intervention by the state Supreme Court spoke for itself and declined additional comment.

The school argued in its petition to the court that the Guadalupe decision covered employees like Ms. Crisitello. It also said that a male teacher at another school in the archdiocese was discharged after his unmarried girlfriend became pregnant, undercutting the claim that only women could be punished.

“Religious institutions of many faiths in this state are now at risk of being swept into the vortex of employment litigation, contrary to the constitutional vision regarding the separation of church and state,” the petition states.

The court has not set a date for oral arguments in the case, which is being watched closely by experts in workplace bias law and a national Catholic schoolteacher union.

Depending on the outcome, it could attract the attention of the United States Supreme Court, lawyers said.

Professor Hawkins said she believed that would be unlikely unless more than one state veered from the legal standard established in Guadalupe. “I think the court will likely wait to see if there is any broader concern that lower courts are not adhering to its decision before it will revisit the issue,” she said.

It is not the first time a teacher at a church-run school was penalized for personal decisions.

An unwed teacher was fired in 2018 from a Catholic school in Pennsylvania after becoming pregnant. In 2016, a female basketball coach who was also a dean at Paramus Catholic High School in Bergen County, N.J., was terminated after marrying another woman. (The Archdiocese of Newark later reportedly settled the woman’s lawsuit out of court.)

Catholic schools, already coping with declining enrollments, often face complaints from parents concerned about flagrant deviations from church moral teachings by teachers, creating a tension that can be difficult for tuition-reliant private schools to navigate, said Mary Kay Rossi, president of the Catholic Teachers Union of South Jersey.

Still, she said her union has handled at least two similar cases involving pregnancies, both of which were resolved without termination.

Rita Schwartz, president of the National Association of Catholic School Teachers, which represents about 3,000 parochial school employees nationwide, bristled at the decisions made by a church still caught in the throes of a sex abuse scandal involving priests.

“The church is supposed to hate the sin, but not hate the sinner,” Ms. Schwartz said. “They should be very happy that she’s not having an abortion. Don’t you think?”

“It should have been handled with love,” she added. “The whole thing in our religion is not fear. It’s not firing. It’s love. She needs help here. She needs people to work with her, and that’s what they’re supposed to be doing — not ‘Off with her head.’”

Other news on this issue:

Supreme Court Backs Catholic Agency in Case on Gay Rights and Foster Care

June 17, 2021

An Extraordinary Winning Streak for Religion at the Supreme Court

April 5, 2021

Job Bias Laws Do Not Protect Teachers in Catholic Schools, Supreme Court Rules

July 8, 2020

Religious Groups Given ‘Exception’ to Work Bias Law

Jan. 11, 2012

Whistleblowers Need To Be Protected

If you are an employee in NYC I think you may have heard about a co-worker who sees another employee do something abusive, harassing, or wholly improper and the observer reports what happened, only to be discontinued or fired for making that report?

Whistleblowers need to have a say and be heard in the workplace.

Note: While I have posted the Outten and Golden LLP blog post below, I do not work for the lawfirm.

Betsy Combier
Editor, ADVOCATZ.com
Editor, ADVOCATZ blog
Editor, Parentadvocates.org
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials

Congress Proposes Vital Protections for Whistleblowers as Workplaces Reopen

by Tammy Marzigliano and Brittany Arnold, Employment Law Blog of Outten and Golden, Apr 7, 2021 | Retaliation & Whistleblowing |

COVID-19 has devastated countless individuals and businesses, both economically and personally. Local, state, and federal agencies have hastily authorized economic relief programs to help ease the impact on families, communities, and the national economy. To address community needs, many agencies quickly distributed funds with minimal oversight.

Although this helped expedite relief payments, it also opened the door for improper distribution of these funds. To prevent fraud and misuse of federal benefits, members of Congress have introduced proposed legislation called the Coronavirus Oversight and Recovery Ethics (CORE) Act, which also includes critical whistleblower protection provisions.

Implementing Federal Oversight and Expanding Whistleblower Protection

Many small businesses need federal grants and loans to continue operations and reopen workplaces successfully. Some will use Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act programs, like the $500 billion corporate bailout fund and the Paycheck Protection Program. As the pandemic continues, Congress may pass additional legislation enabling other loan and grant programs to help avoid economic disaster for businesses and individuals.

To reduce profiteering and ensure that CARES Act benefits and other federal aid funds are fairly and lawfully distributed, the CORE Act proposes a multi-faceted approach, tackling potential fraud from many angles, that:

• Empowers and funds the Office of Government Ethics to take steps to reduce conflicts of interest in the selection or hiring of contractors or advisors and the distribution of relief grants and loans, including prohibiting receipt of bailout funds by companies closely connected to government officials.
• Protects Inspectors General from retaliation by requiring them to be removed only for cause, requiring Congress to be notified of their removal, and providing Inspector Generals a means to bring suit to challenge the firing.
• Strengthens the authority of the Congressional Oversight Commission by expanding their jurisdiction to all COVID-19 relief funding and providing them with subpoena authority, as well as the oversight entities and Executive Branch accountability requirements of the CARES Act, including requiring a weekly reporting of instances in which they were unreasonably denied information from the executive branch.
• Restricts lobbying and political spending by bailout recipient companies by requiring monthly reporting to prevent “quid pro quo” handouts.
• Improves transparency about the disbursal of bailout funding by requiring public reporting detailing the use of the funds, the recipients, employee compensation data – including bonuses, and whether the company has been charged with violations of federal law.
• Establishes strong whistleblower protections for government employees, government contractors, and private-sector workers who witness and report waste, fraud, or abuse or are victims of misconduct.
• Creates individual causes of action for individuals harmed by the prohibited misconduct, allowing private lawsuits, and establishes personal responsibility for senior executives for their corporate wrongdoing.

Fleshing Out Employee Whistleblower Protections

Several laws are already in effect to protect employees who blow the whistle on misuse or theft of federal funds during the coronavirus pandemic. The federal False Claims Act (FCA), for example, protects and even provides incentives for workers who report employers misusing, misappropriating, or improperly obtaining government funds. Properly making a claim under the FCA, however, can be complicated, and the law contains numerous restrictions and exclusions limiting who can file a suit.

The CORE Act would protect most workers who reasonably believe their employer is misusing economic aid related to COVID-19, allowing them to report alleged improprieties without fear of reprisal or retaliation. It would also protect workers from retaliation after reporting conduct they “reasonably believe[] would require the employee to violate th[e] Act . . . with respect to any Coronavirus pandemic-related program, project, or activity.” The proposed Act leaves it to the Secretary of Labor to establish the rules and procedures for administrative investigation and hearings, appeals, and relief, indicating that – as much as possible, it should mirror the Taxpayer First Act.  As more organizations apply for and receive these vital federal benefits and use them to reopen, returning workers will play a critical role in preventing employers’ unscrupulous behavior.

Employees who know of or suspect their employers of fraud or who have concerns about the safety of their workplace should consult an attorney immediately. Numerous state and federal statutes protect whistleblowers, but every situation is unique. An experienced attorney – like the lawyers in Outten & Golden’s Whistleblower-Retaliation Practice Group – can help you chart the best course of action for your situation.

Section 740 - Retaliatory personnel action by employers; prohibition

Whistleblower Claims on the Horizon Amid COVID-19 Pandemic

1. Proskauer Rose LLPSteven J. PearlmanApril 20, 2020

   The NLRB held that such a policy restricted the employee’s right to publicly complain about workplace issues of common concern to all employees, and therefore, the employee was “discharged for engaging in protected concerted union activity in violation of Section 8(a)(1) and 8(a)(3).”New York Whistleblower StatutesNew York has two whistleblower statutes—New York Labor Law § 740 and New York Labor Law § 741—that may be relevant to claims arising from COVID-19, but differ from one another in significant respects, as discussed below. As we have previously reported, the New York whistleblower statute, New York Labor Law § 740, protects employees from retaliation for reporting a violation of the law that “creates and presents a substantial and specific danger to the public health or safety.”

2. Can I be Fired for Refusing to Report to Work During the Coronavirus Pandemic?

   Sanford Heisler Kimpel LLPAndrew MelzerMarch 28, 2020

   For example, New York State law protects employees who “object to, or refuse to participate in any activity, policy, or practice” “that is in violation of law, rule, or regulation which violation creates and presents a substantial and specific danger to the public health or safety.” NY Labor Law § 740(2). This would seem to include refusals to violate official stay-at-home or social distancing orders.

3. Port Authority Not Subject to Worker-Friendly New Jersey Whistleblower Law, State Court Rules

   Jackson Lewis P.C.Richard CinoMarch 29, 2017

   Sullivan maintained he was pushed out because, in 2011, he reported to his superior, the Chief and Director of Public Safety, that he confronted an officer who had obtained photographed copies of an examination to become a sergeant in the Port Authority’s police department. In August 2012, Sullivan served a notice of claim on the Port Authority, alleging violations of the New York Whistleblower Law (NYWL), N.Y. Lab. Law § 740, and the New York Civil Service Law. N.Y. Civ. Serv. Law § 75(b). On May 15, 2013, he filed a complaint in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Hudson County, alleging retaliation and civil conspiracy in violation of CEPA, and sought reinstatement and damages.

4. Healthcare Litigation - February 2017

   Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLPBarry LandsbergFebruary 23, 2017

   Id., § 1-502, 1-505(5), (6). Other states with similar healthcare employee whistleblower statues that authorize money damages in actions brought by an employee physician against a hospital include (but are not necessarily limited to): Illinois (210 ILCS 86/35, 86/40); New York (N.Y. Labor Law §§ 740, 741); and Texas (Health & Safety Code § 161.134).

5. Health Update - February 2017

   Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLPKinda SerafiFebruary 22, 2017

   Id., § 1-502, 1-505(5), (6). Other states with similar healthcare employee whistleblower statues that authorize money damages in actions brought by an employee physician against a hospital include (but are not necessarily limited to): Illinois (210 ILCS 86/35, 86/40); New York (N.Y. Labor Law §§ 740, 741); and Texas (Health & Safety Code § 161.134).

6. Employees Need Not Identify Specific Law, Rule or Regulation Violation in Pleading Retaliation Claim Under New York’s Whistleblower Statute

   Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.David KatzMay 29, 2014

   Earlier this month, in Webb-Weber v. Community Action for Human Services, Inc., New York’s highest court overruled several appellate court cases in holding that an employee need not identify the specific law, rule or regulation allegedly violated by his or her employer in pleading a retaliation claim under New York’s whistleblower statute. Ms. Webb-Weber served as COO of Community Action, a not-for-profit organization providing social services to the mentally and physically disabled and subject to oversight by the State. Plaintiff filed suit against Community Action claiming that it terminated her in violation of New York Labor Law § 740, the “whistleblower statute,” for registering complaints with public agencies concerning certain policies and practices of Community Action. Specifically, according to her complaint, Ms. Webb-Weber alerted Community Action to issues she claimed endangered the welfare and safety of patients, including falsification of patient medication and treatment records, inadequate fire safety, mistreatment of residents and deficiencies in patient care and in the facility itself.

7. New York’s Court of Appeals Makes it Easier to Plead Whistleblower Law Claims

   Hodgson Russ LLPJoseph BrownMay 23, 2014

   The Court of Appeals’ decision in Webb-Weber v. Community Action for Human Services, Inc. likely means that more whistleblower claims will be able to survive the motion to dismiss stage and can proceed to the discovery stage, which can be expensive and time consuming. By way of background, New York Labor Law § 740, commonly referred to as the “whistleblower statute,” prohibits an employer from retaliating against an employee who “discloses or threatens to disclose to a supervisor or public body an activity, policy, or practice of the employer that is in violation of the law, rule or regulation” that either “creates and presents a substantial and specific danger to the public health or safety, or…constitutes health care fraud.” To prevail under this law — which applies to both private and public employers — a whistleblower must ultimately establish an act