Swartz v. Interventional Rehab. of S. Fla., Inc.

Swartz v. Interventional Rehab. of S. Fla., Inc.

Opinion

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 26], filed on December 22, 2021. The Court has reviewed Plaintiff's Response in Opposition [ECF No. 32], Defendant's Reply [ECF No. 36], and the full record. For the reasons that follow, Defendant's Motion [ECF No. 26] is GRANTED.

BACKGROUND

This case arises from an employment dispute between Plaintiff Sidney Swartz, MD ("Dr. Swartz" or "Plaintiff") and Defendant Interventional Rehabilitation of South Florida, Inc. ("IRSF" or "Defendant"). The material facts viewed in the light most favorable to Plaintiff as the non-moving party are as follows.¹

A. Complaints of Unprofessionalism filed Against Dr. Swartz

Beginning in 2015, Dr. Swartz was employed by Defendant IRSF and its [*2]  predecessor, Mid-Florida Anesthesia Associates, Inc., to provide pain management physician services [ECF No. 24 ¶ 3]. During his tenure, Dr. Swartz was the leading financial producer for the medical practice, and most patients requested Dr. Swartz's services above other physicians in the group [ECF No. 33 ¶ 99; ECF No. 35 ¶ 99].

Despite these positive attributes, Dr. Swartz nonetheless was the subject of several complaints from fellow employees who alleged that Dr. Swartz engaged in unprofessional behavior [ECF No. 25 ¶ 22; ECF No. 33 ¶ 22].

For instance, on October 26, 2018, Jackie Giroux, the Director of Operations for Pain Management, reported concerns about Dr. Swartz to senior management at IRSF, alleging that Dr. Swartz had exhibited "aggressive" and "inappropriate" behavior to fellow employees, including harassing staff by texting "after hours with harassing comments and profanity," "gossiping at work," "demeaning staff," and "creating chaos and fabricating information that negatively affected physicians in the group" [ECF No. 23-21; ECF No. 25 ¶ 20; ECF No. 33 ¶ 20].

In response to these concerns, senior management at IRSF prepared a letter intended to address Dr. Swartz's conduct [*3]  with coworkers in the workplace [ECF No. 23-26; ECF No. 25 ¶ 21; ECF No. 33 ¶ 21]. The letter, dated November 2, 2018, identified a list of unacceptable behaviors by Dr. Swartz, including "unprofessional behavior" with "explosive outbursts and personal verbal attacks;" "[d]isregard for company policy and compliance on the utilization of noncertified Medical Assistants;" "continued disregard for chain of command and protocol when addressing staff and clinical concerns" despite "multiple conversations addressing this from both Operations and Clinical Leadership"; "refusal to work with staff'; and inappropriate verbal, written, and text communication to staff and management [ECF No. 25 ¶ 22; ECF No. 33 ¶ 22]. The letter ultimately was never sent to Dr. Swartz [ECF No. 33 ¶ 115; ECF No. 35 ¶ 115].

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.