Employment LawLAWSUITNEGLIGENCE LIABILITYUNQUALIFED GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEESFAILURE TO FOLLOW THEIR OWN RULES ERRORSLIABILITY UNQUALIFIED GOVERNMENT INVESTIGATORS AND JUDGESWRONGFUL JUDGEMENTSDENIED BENEF

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION

DOROTHY ARTIS-DAVIS, )

Appellant, )

v. )

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

ENGLAND ASSOCIATES, LP, ) 1:18-CV-04620-ODE-LTW

d.b.a. NEW LONDON HEALTH CENTER )

And )

RSUI GROUP INC. AMERISURE, LEGAL COUNSEL, FREEMAN MATHIS & GARY, LLP, ATTORNEY MARY ANNE ACKOURNEY, SWIFT, CURRIE, MCGHEE & HEIRS, ATTORNEY MARK IRBY, (2) GOVERNMENT & GOVERNMENT AGENCIES (I Dorothy A. Artis am alleging the Department of Labor, Department of Labor Appeals, Gwinnett Superior Court, Equal Opportunity Commission, Federal District Court, State Board of Workers’ Compensation and my formal employer, New London Health Services and its legal counsel),

Appellees,

DISCRIMINATION/CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT & LAWSUIT

LIBEL DEFAMATION

UNLAWFUL BUSINESS PRACTICES

DISCRIMINATION COMPLAINT

Retaliation, Wrongful Termination, Hostile Work environment

BRIEF OF APPELLANT

COMES NOW Appellant Dorothy A. Artis, pro se below, and files this brief on appeal.

1. STATEMENT OF FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS

Unlawful Employment Discrimination, Retaliation, Harassment and Wrongful Termination

New London Health Center is a skilled care nursing facility that provides short term rehabilitation and long term care located in Snellville, GA. The plaintiff, Dorothy A. Artis began her employment with New London Health Center in October 11, 2013 as a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA). Ms. Artis was a long-term, role model employee that was in good standing at the company, who was even entrusted to train new hires. She had plans to stay at the company for a long time

During her employment at New London Health Center, Ms. Artis began to witness many violations that violated mandated state and federal laws and according to the employee guidelines and handbook that Ms. Artis signed at the beginning of her employment with New London Health Center, she was required to report on the violations that she witnessed within the company. In addition, Ms. Artis felt that her management’s desire for her to keep her integrity on the job and not commit fraudulent practices that were being done, led to the future harassment, discrimination and unfair treatment towards her.

Beginning on April 20, 2015, Ms. Artis reported to her superiors by using the company’s Open Door Policy about discrimination, harassment and unfair treatment concerning a senior employee’s racially derogatory comments made to her. According to the New London Health Center Employee Handbook, these types of behaviors and actions called for immediate termination. Instead of taking actions, superiors favored the employee that had committed the behavior against Ms. Artis and instead, the information was leaked back to that employee, which led to a further hostile work environment with excessive bullying on a daily basis.

On April 26, 2015, Ms. Artis was fired on her day off after working a double shift to accommodate patient care coverage. She was terminated by phone after previously having complained the day before that she did not want to commit fraudulent overbilling practices to Medicaid/Medicare for patient services that were not performed. She was told that all three shifts would add extra care procedures to offset recent fines. Nursing Director Jeanie Hermes asked Ms. Artis to come in to sign the termination for sleeping on the clock, which called for immediate termination according to the employee handbook. Ms. Artis felt as though she was being compared to other employees as less favored and at that time asked for an investigation according to the employee handbook due to protocols not being followed for a 24 hour investigation. Jeanie Hermes had stated that she liked the other employee involved better, that she was her favorite and she believed her. The termination was later reduced to a swift three day suspension without pay and without a 24 hour investigation.

On May 7, 2015 Ms. Artis had an incident with a patient during work hours and sustained injuries during the course of said incident. After reporting the incident in a timely manner to a supervisor, who input the incident into the online system, she was then given the run around about the necessary paperwork needed to fill out regarding filing a workman’s compensation claim. This incident was reported to Ms. Artis superiors Maissa Kamara, Joan Johnson, Teresa, and Jeanie Hermes, who she thought did not want to file a workers’ compensation claim because it would affect their bonuses. Ms. Artis was told by Joan Johnson, Jeanie Hermes, Don, director of nursing, and Jessica Schroder to just use her own personal insurance. The investigation into the incident was purported to be ongoing or under an investigation until further notice, but when she requested a full investigation into the matter, she was told by Joan Johnson and Jeanie Hermes that it was an on-going and confidential investigation and if it was discussed, Ms. Artis would be terminated. The incident caused Ms. Artis to sustain a disabling injury and repeatedly thereafter, Ms. Artis employment file was tampered with on a repeated basis in a way not observed that other employees of the company endured.

On June 26, 2015, Ms. Artis once again reported to her superior, Joan Johnson in HR and Jessica Schroder confidential concerning the discrimination and unfair treatment that she was receiving in the employment setting. Confidential information was leaked back to the offending employees and conflicting false malicious reports were leaked to create ad hostile environment. These were the same employees that Ms. Artis reported for patient safety violations and unreported falls and injuries. As a result, Ms. Artis received a write-up in her permanent employee file for something that she did not commit, which went against New London Health Care’s own employee handbook stating that there should be a 24 hour investigation. Ms. Artis believed this action of being written up, to have been done in retaliation.

Ms. Artis believes, as told to her by Zena Slater and Rosemary (unit secretary), that her superior Joan Bernard assigned 10 to 17 people to harass her on a daily basis. These people invaded her personal space and she was in turn forced to work alone, which is a safety violation; forced to endure derogatory name calling with racist undertones such as, “lazy ni****”; no lunch breaks; and long work days and punishments. This caused Ms. Artis to suffer greatly with nightmares, night sweats, and fear of authority, PTSD, depression, panic attacks and uncontrolled high blood pressure (the medical claims are documented in Ms. Artis’ medical records). See 42 U.S. Code § 2000e–2 - Unlawful employment practices.

Ms. Artis’ final day of employment is a point of disagreement between employee and employer. According to Ms. Artis, the final incident on July 1, 2015, she asked her director of nursing for modified work duty because she was unable to stand (due to a previous work related injury that went untreated due to employer’s non filing of a workman’s compensation claim) and was afraid that she would possibly injure a patient. She was told that the claim, from May, was still under investigation and that her nursing director would have to let her go because she didn’t have anywhere to put her. The nursing director went on to say that she was busy and didn’t “have time for this” and closed the door on Ms. Artis. A few minutes later, she called in seven of my co-workers who were also CNAs and one LPN.

Around lunchtime, Zena Slater abandoned her patient and came into Ms. Artis’ personal space, snatched a tray from Ms. Artis hands, was yelling and cussing her out by calling her derogatory “N words” and referenced as “you people in this country as lazy n words”, while also threatening to choke Ms. Artis. Slater then struck Ms. Artis with a tray causing an injury. Pauline, the LPN, then started to threaten Ms. Artis and when Ms. Artis went to report them, Rosemary claimed that Joan Johnson had appointed them with the authority to watch Ms. Artis to ensure that she does her work and harass her. Ms. Artis reported these incidents to Joan Bernard, Nursing director but was instead reprimanded by Bernard for not taking orders from people. Ms. Artis complained of the unfair treatment and taking orders from the same titled employees. Joan Bernard discharged me from employment on this day and later provided that the reason for my termination was a “no call, no show”. Also note that Ms. Artis also reported the unit secretaries Rosemary and Kathy who were practicing care duties without a license to do so.

Being terminated from her job was not enough as Joan Bernard, Joan Johnson, and Maissa Kamara submitted forged and fraudulent documents to government agencies to cover unlawful business practices and as a result, Ms. Artis was denied Unemployment benefits, and Worker’s Compensation benefits based on their unethical and illegal actions.

1. ENUMERATION OF ERRORS

1. The court erred in determining that appellant did not meet the burden of proof for disparate treatment among employees of the same job level.

2. The court erred in stating that the appellant’s claim for retaliation is insufficiently pled.

3. The court erred in determining that the appellant did not provide sufficient factual allegations to maintain a hostile work environment claim.

1. STANDARD OF REVIEW

1. The appellant did not meet the burden of proof for disparate treatment among employees of the same job level

Due to the outcome of the previous rulings in the lower court, the appellant did not have a chance to present evidence of her qualifications for the job that she undertook at New London Health Center. Ms. Artis’ position at New London Health Center was that of a Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA). The job of a CNA is to help patients or clients with their healthcare needs under the supervision of a Registered Nurse (RN) or a Licensed Practical Nurse (LPN). Ms. Artis has a long list of degrees and certificates that more than qualifies her for the position of a CNA. She has an Associates and Bachelors in Health Care Management amongst other degrees and certificates that she received before, during and after her tenure at New London Health Center. In her previous court filings, Ms. Artis has mentioned the roles of her co-workers at both the CNA level and a LPN that were involved in the continued harassment that she endured on the job. In fact, she mentions that these CNAs and one LPN were called in by her nursing director in order that they command and give her orders. So the allegations that Ms. Artis was not taking orders, arises from the favoritism given to her co-workers, fellow CNAs, who were not her superiors and therefore had no direct authority as to the duties that she performed on the job.

2. The appellant’s claim for retaliation is insufficiently pled.

The claim that Ms. Artis did not sufficiently plead for her claim of retaliation has not been properly weighed. Based on documentation, Ms. Artis can and has shown that she has endured unjust harassment from her co-workers, which caused her to be called out of her name by being called the “N-word”. Her discharge from her job based on reasons other than the truth, violates the tenant of public policy for instance, that companies can’t fire workers for refusing a boss’s order to commit a crime. Ms. Artis has noted several times that she refused the orders by superiors to commit fraud during the course of her job. Ms. Artis has maintained that the termination of her employment was based on retaliation against her due to her initial complaint on June 15, 2015, prior to the discharge of her employment. The law provides protection against relation for a person, like Ms. Artis, who has filed a complaint of discrimination. June 15, 2015, was Ms. Artis initial complain of discrimination against New London Health Center. The record will show that Ms. Artis also endured retaliation against her every time that she performed the duty of a “whistleblower,” which is an activity that is protected by law. She not only refused to participate in illegal activities, but she also reported colleagues/co-workers that she observed committing actions that were not only illegal, but based on her employee handbook, frowned upon by the company. In reporting such actions, Ms. Artis was only rewarded with harassment and name calling from co-workers who did not appreciate her reports of illegal activities.

3. The Appellant did not provide sufficient factual allegations to maintain a hostile work environment.

The court states that under current law, the single use of a racial epithet by a coworker does not rise to the level of actionable conduct, however, this case is different in that Ms. Artis did not just hear someone say the word to others, but it was said to her on multiple occasions. In Smelter v. Southern Home Care Services, Inc., the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals held that the use of the N-Word, even on one occasion could create a hostile work environment and the Court held that the employer could be held liable in that case even though the alleged harassment was not reported. In this case, Ms. Artis complained and reported to her superiors on at least three occasions of the harassment by other employees at the New London Health Center and repeatedly no action was taken. Also, on each of these occasions, Ms. Artis' complaints made it back to those whom she accused of such harassment, which in turn made the harassment worse. Those in positions of authority at New London Health Center had a duty to mitigate and investigate the harassment claims and nowhere throughout court proceedings is it shown that they attempted to do that, what is shown is that all they have done is deny the claims and make Ms. Artis out to be an unreliable witness.

1. CONCLUSION

Based on the aforementioned errors, I, Ms. Artis, believes that this case of discrimination, harassment and unlawful termination be reviewed and retried in a court of law. I, Ms. Artis, have not been able, to this point to present my case in the court of law, but instead, I’ve been denied time and time again and it has felt as though the justice system has failed me. I maintain my testimony that I had my constitutional rights, employment rights and human rights violated by my former employer, New London Health Center.

New London intentionally did not comply with state and federal laws and committed malicious criminal acts to cover up the truth to protect their assets while failing to protect my constitutional rights and my assets. New London intentionally and willingly violated my rights and continued to violate them by manufacturing oral and written false reports to hinder an investigation with government officials. New London also willingly and intentionally denied me my constitutional rights to fair treatment and equality by repeatedly falsely representing and denying workers comp. benefits and unemployment benefits, to which I was lawfully entitled. Upon further review of New London, the true evidence of an intentional wrongful termination will be exposed.

New London, working in conjunction with their attorneys did willfully and intentionally try to cover up the truth of their intentional discrimination and hide their wrongdoings. New London had more than 18 months to correct their intentional wrongdoings but instead hired attorneys to protect their wrongdoings and hide the truth. In doing so this caused further discrimination to me due to falsifying and manufacturing illegal documents to their party government officials to gain favorable outcomes in court proceedings. This all was doing to overlook the fact that New London had no legitimate reason to terminate my long-term employment other than discrimination based on race and to cover up their injustices.

New London’s continued intentional misconduct and discrimination was based on unequal and unfair treatment. I was discriminated against because I reported mandated laws and wrongdoing. New London did not allow me to participate in my sanctions (suspensions), employment decisions or my intentional wrongful discrimination. I was only allowed to participate in overbilling the government providers Medicaid/Medicare for services we did not render. New London encouraged excessive overbilling for resident care that was not performed. A meeting was held on how to enter the information three times a day. I openly declined to participate in these fraudulent practices and did address it as such. I had several complaints but was ignored by New London as it seemed their own priority was protecting their bottom line, their profits. Each investigation that I requested was either ignored or said it was ongoing although there was not paperwork nor was there any conclusion. These things were said to get rid of me. New London used cheap labor and encouraged discord while they hid behind their bonuses gained through illegal practices.

I would like the case to be reviewed and upon reinstatement I would like to pursue a jury trial. From New London I am seeking actual damages, punitive damages and compensatory damages based on unlawful discrimination and unlawful, illegal employment violations.

Dorothy A. Artis

1051 Canton Road #228

Marietta, GA. 30066

(770) 837-4741

Email: [email protected]