Summary
The Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia reviewed a jury verdict awarding Susan Nutter damages against Herbert J. Thomas Memorial Hospital Association for wrongful discharge, intentional infliction of emotional distress, defamation, and unpaid wages. The court held that the wrongful-discharge and emotional-distress claims lacked sufficient evidentiary support, that the defamation claim was barred by the statute of limitations, and that the wage claim required a new trial because of the circuit court's conduct during trial. The judgment was reversed and remanded.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the evidence was legally sufficient to support the jury's verdict for wrongful discharge in contravention of substantial public policy.
- Whether the evidence was legally sufficient to support the jury's verdict for intentional infliction of emotional distress.
- Whether Nutter's defamation claim was barred by West Virginia's one-year statute of limitations.
- Whether the circuit court abused its discretion and committed cumulative trial error requiring a new trial on the unpaid-wage claim.
Holdings
- A plaintiff cannot establish wrongful discharge merely by citing statutes or regulations as sources of public policy; the plaintiff must present legally sufficient evidence that the discharge actually jeopardized or undermined a specific public policy. Because Nutter presented no such evidence, the hospital was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
- The evidence did not permit a reasonable jury to find that the hospital's conduct was sufficiently extreme and outrageous, or that it intended or recklessly caused severe emotional distress. The hospital was therefore entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
- Nutter's defamation claim was barred by West Virginia Code section 55-2-12(c) because she knew or should have known of the allegedly defamatory report no later than December 11, 2009, but did not file suit until August 11, 2011.
- The evidence was sufficient to support the unpaid-wage claim, but cumulative trial errors—including the circuit court's questioning of witnesses and uneven evidentiary rulings—made the jury's verdict inherently unreliable and required a new trial on that claim.
Key quotations
“Under this test, a plaintiff cannot simply cite a source of public policy and then make a bald allegation that the policy might somehow have been violated.” (238 W. Va. at 385)
“The plaintiff’s mere citation of federal regulations as sources of public policy is insufficient.” (238 W. Va. at 389)
“Taking the record as a whole, we find the jury’s entire verdict to be inherently unreliable.” (238 W. Va. at 393)
Factual background
Susan Nutter worked as a charge nurse in Thomas Memorial's geriatric psychiatric unit. After reviewing allegedly conflicting patient documentation on November 12, 2009, hospital managers concluded that Nutter had documented care she did not provide and terminated her on November 16, 2009. The hospital reported the termination to the West Virginia Board of Examiners for Registered Professional Nurses, which took no licensing action but cautioned Nutter regarding documentation practices. Nutter also claimed that the hospital failed to pay her charge-nurse wage differential and that her discharge was retaliatory because she had complained about patient care, staffing, billing, and related issues.
Procedural history
Nutter sued Thomas Memorial in the Circuit Court of Kanawha County after her November 2009 termination, alleging retaliatory discharge, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and unpaid wages. The circuit court additionally submitted defamation to the jury. The jury found for Nutter on all four claims and awarded $998,000 in damages plus $6,900 in unpaid wages. The circuit court entered judgment on the verdict and denied the hospital's Rule 50(b) and Rule 59 post-trial motions. The Supreme Court of Appeals reversed judgment as a matter of law on the wrongful-discharge, emotional-distress, and defamation claims and remanded the wage claim for a new trial.
Remand instructions
Remand for further proceedings and a new trial limited to Nutter's unpaid-wage claim. The wrongful-discharge, intentional-infliction-of-emotional-distress, and defamation claims are resolved in favor of the hospital as a matter of law.