Salamon v. Our Lady of Victory Hosp.
From Conservapedia
In Salamon v. Our Lady of Victory Hosp., 514 F.3d 217 (2d Cir. 2008), the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that a physician working as an independent contractor at a hospital may be able to sue for employment discrimination in connection with a sham peer review if the hospital exerts so much control over the physician that it establishes a common law employment relationship, or takes action that interferes with future employment by the physician.
The Court ruled that:[1]
- policies that merely reflect professional and governmental regulatory standards may not typically impose the kind of control that marks an employment relationship. See Cilecek v. Inova Health Sys. Servs., 115 F.3d 256, 262 (4th Cir. 1997). But while the defendants describe their standards as being "mandated by state and federal statutes and regulations," Supp. App. at 21 (citing Health Care Quality Improvement Act of 1986, 42 U.S.C. §§ 11101-11152; N.Y. Pub. Health Law art. 28; N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 10, § 405), those statutes do not dictate the detailed treatment requirements OLV instituted. They concern health care administration, record keeping, financing, liability, patients' rights, and the delegation of responsibilities. To the extent motive is relevant to the "manner and means" analysis -- an issue upon which we express no opinion here -- Salamon has adduced evidence that some of the practices pressed on her by the hospital were not motivated by concern over compliance with external statutes and regulations, but aimed at maximizing OLV's revenue and punishing her for complaining about Moore's harassment.
The Court emphasized that "staff privileges, standing alone, do not decide employment status."[2]
