LOS ANGELES – A California appellate court decided that a trial court erred in admitting testimony regarding the acquittal of a trio of nurses in criminal court, which was used to prove their case in a civil trial brought against a hospital.
The Second Appellate District, Division One partially reversed a judgment against Community Hospital of Long Beach and remanded it to Los Angeles Superior Court on Feb. 13 after a jury had awarded Judy Alexander, Johann Hellmannsberger and Lisa Harris $4.7 million.
“We are thus well satisfied that it is reasonably probable a result more favorable to the hospital would have been reached in the absence of the error,” wrote Associate Justice Victoria Gerrard Chaney in the opinion, which was certified for publication on March 10.
Justice Frances Rothschild and Judge Gregory J. Weingart concurred in the opinion.
The opinion states Alexander was terminated in 2009 for allegedly placing a patient in a physical restraint without a physician's order. Alexander alleged that previously she reported her supervisor, Keith Kohl, for discriminatory treatment. When Harris and Hellmannsberger refused to collude against Alexander, they too were fired based on the same abuse allegation as Alexander, the opinion states. All three found jobs elsewhere but the state filed criminal charges against them a year later. They were later acquitted.
“As a result of her termination from College Hospital, Alexander lost her home and lived in her car for a while before moving in with her aunt and eventually finding new work,” the decision states. “Hellmannsberger actively sought work for a year and a half before eventually finding a job as a staff nurse. Harris passed away in September 2014, having never found another job. Her son was substituted as a plaintiff.”
Eventually, the nurses were acquitted and sued the hospital over allegations of wrongful termination, defamation, negligent supervision and won, but the hospital appealed.
“Community Hospital contends the trial court erroneously admitted evidence that the plaintiffs had cleared their names, arguing the reference can only be to the criminal proceedings, in violation of the court’s in limine rulings,” Chaney wrote. “We agree.”
Chaney also ruled that there was insufficient evidence to support claims of negligent supervision.
“The hospital contends no substantial evidence supported its liability to Alexander and Harris for negligent supervision of Kohl because no evidence suggested it was aware before Kohl committed misconduct that he had a propensity to do so,” Chaney wrote. “We agree.”
The court also ordered a new trial for all of Hellmannsberger's claims and for Harris' and and Alexander's claims for defamation and negligent supervision.
"The trial court is directed to order a new trial as to Alexander’s and/or Harris’s claims for sexual harassment, sexual orientation discrimination, failure to investigate and prevent harassment and discrimination, retaliation, and wrongful termination in violation of public policy," Chaney wrote. "Each side is to bear its own costs on appeal."