Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Mark Hays, M.D. vs. Erlanger Health System
Mark Hays, M.D. vs. Erlanger Health System
Defendant.
COMPLAINT
Plaintiff, Mark Hays, M.D. (“Plaintiff” or “Dr. Hays”), by and through his attorneys, Grant,
Konvalinka & Harrison, P.C., hereby files this Complaint against Chattanooga-Hamilton County
Hospital Authority, d/b/a Erlanger Health System (“Defendant” or “Erlanger”) for unlawful
employment actions pursuant to the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (“ADEA”), 29 U.S.C.
I.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s ADEA claim pursuant to
2. The actions which gave rise to this complaint all occurred in or around
Chattanooga, Hamilton County, Tennessee, making venue proper in this District pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1391.
-1-
employed as a physician, working as a pediatric cardiologist since 2001. From 2001 to 2017,
Dr. Hays was the Chairman of the Pediatric Cardiology Department at Erlanger. At all times
relevant to the events that are the subject of this Complaint, Plaintiff was over forty years of age.
seq., which operates Erlanger hospital and other medical facilities and which has several thousand
employees at locations throughout southeast Tennessee, northern Georgia and western North
Carolina. It may be served through its registered agent, National Registered Agents, Inc., 300
III.
FACTS
6. Defendant hired Dr. Hays in January of 2001 to serve as the Chairman of its
Pediatric Cardiology Department. On June 29, 2010, Dr. Hays signed an employment agreement
with Defendant, pursuant to which he continued to serve as Chairman of Pediatric Cardiology for
Defendant. The term of the contract was one year, with automatic renewals for successive one-
7. On June 6, 2017, Dr. Hays received a letter from Steven H. Burkett, Defendant’s
Vice President for Physician Services, notifying Dr. Hays that his employment agreement with
-2-
to terminate the employment agreement pursuant to the “without cause” provision of the
agreement. In fact, Defendant unlawfully terminated Dr. Hays’ contract because Dr. Hays was 63
years old.
8. Dr. Hays had never been disciplined throughout his employment with Defendant.
On the contrary, Dr. Hays’ performance evaluations were overwhelmingly positive, including
“excellent model of division director.” In short, throughout his employment and at the time of the
termination of his employment, Dr. Hays was not only qualified for his position but was also an
exemplary employee.
10. During the year in which Defendant terminated Dr. Hays’ employment and in the
several years preceding, Defendant had systematically terminated the employment of a number of
11. Prior to unlawfully terminating Dr. Hays’ employment, Defendant gave Plaintiff
no reason for its decision. In fact, Defendant unlawfully terminated Plaintiff’s employment
Defendant, Dr. Hays suffered damages, including loss of back pay and benefits, including but not
-3-
14. The EEOC issued Dr. Hays a Notice of Right to Sue, dated July 22, 2019.
IV.
PLAINTIFF’S CLAIM – AGE DISCRIMINATION
15. Dr. Hays incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1 – 14 as if set forth fully herein.
16. Defendant discriminated against Dr. Hays in violation of the ADEA, 29 U.S.C.
§ 621 et seq.
V.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully asks the Court for the following relief:
a. That the Court issue process to the Defendant requiring an answer to this Complaint
b. That after a hearing in this case, Plaintiff be awarded judgment for damages,
including back pay and benefits, caused by Defendant’s discrimination and unlawful actions;
c. That the Court order Defendant to reemploy Plaintiff at an equivalent job, with all
employee rights and benefits to which he was entitled or would be entitled but for his unlawful
discharge;
d. That, alternatively to reemployment, the Court award Plaintiff front pay and
e. That Plaintiff be awarded liquidated damages in an amount equal to his loss of pay
and benefits;
-4-
1:19-cv-291
CHATTANOOGA-HAMILTON COUNTY
HOSPITAL AUTHORITY, d/b/a ERLANGER
HEALTH SYSTEM