Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Kinsella v. Indiana University Health Care Associates, Inc.

United States District Court, S.D. Indiana, Indianapolis Division

July 1, 2019

SANDRA KINSELLA, Plaintiff,
v.
INDIANA UNIVERSITY HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATES, INC., Defendant.

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ON PLAINTIFF'S SECOND MOTION TO REOPEN CASE

          MATTHEW P. BROOKMAN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         I. Introduction

         Plaintiff, Sandra Kinsella, has filed a motion to reopen this case pursuant to the parties' Settlement Agreement. (Docket No. 87). On May 22, 2019, the Honorable Jane Magnus-Stinson referred this matter to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) to conduct any necessary hearings and issue a report and recommendation regarding the proper disposition of the second motion to reopen the case. (Docket No. 88). Plaintiff's request is opposed and fully briefed. (Docket No. 90; Docket No. 91[1]). The undersigned having reviewed the parties' filings and, being duly advised, hereby recommends that Plaintiff's Second Motion to Reopen the Case (Docket No. 87) be granted.

         II. Background

         On August 9, 2016, Dr. Kinsella filed a lawsuit against Defendant, Indiana University Health Care Associates, Inc. (d/b/a Indiana University Health Physicians) (“IUHP”), in state court, which was removed to this court on August 24, 2016. (Docket No. 1). On December 22, 2016, Dr. Kinsella filed her Second Amended Complaint, alleging gender discrimination, retaliation, and wrongful termination. (Docket No. 26). On November 10, 2017, Dr. Kinsella filed her Statement of Claims, identifying only sex harassment and discrimination as her remaining claims against IUHP, and omitting any reference to her retaliation or wrongful termination claims. (Docket No. 64).

         Shortly thereafter, on November 30, 2017, the parties entered into a Settlement Agreement. (Docket No. 87). In pertinent part, the Settlement Agreement[2] provided:

Dr. Kinsella may ask the Court to re-open the Action to allow the Action to proceed if Drs. Allison, Hardacher, Johnson, Kritzmire or Latham do not receive a contract renewal during the relevant period, [3] or Dr. Kinsella receives evidence of what she believes to be unlawful gender discrimination against female IUHP anesthesiologists by Dr. Presson or the IUHP Anesthesiology Division leaders.

(Docket No. 87 at ECF p. 1).

         The Agreement also provided:

Any such request by Dr. Kinsella to reopen the Action shall not reference any lack of contract renewal to one of the relevant physicians, but shall merely reference “the parties' agreement following the Court's settlement conference on November 29, 2017” as the basis for the request to re-open the Action.

(Docket No. 87 at ECF p. 1).

         On December 1, 2017, the court acknowledged that a resolution had been reached and granted the parties leave to file a motion for administrative closure. (Docket No. 66). The parties filed a joint request to administratively close the matter (Docket No. 67), which was granted. (Docket No. 68).

         Dr. Kinsella seeks to employ the above-listed provisions of the Settlement Agreement to reopen this matter.[4] IUHP objects and argues that Dr. Kinsella has not satisfied the Agreement's requirements to reopen.

         III. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.