You are on page 1of 45

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 1 of 45

1 Eugene D. Lee (SB#: 236812)


LAW OFFICE OF EUGENE LEE
2 555 West Fifth Street, Suite 3100
Los Angeles, CA 90013
3 Phone: (213) 992-3299
Fax: (213) 596-0487
4 email: elee@LOEL.com

5 Attorney for Plaintiff


DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O.
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10 FRESNO DIVISION

11 DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O., Civil Action No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG

12 Plaintiff, PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE


SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF
13 v. DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT
14 COUNTY OF KERN, et al., [Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a)]

15 Defendants. Date: January 12, 2009


Time: 10:00
16 Judge: Hon. Oliver W. Wanger
Courtroom: 3
17
Complaint Filed: January 6, 2007
18 Trial Date: March 24, 2009

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 1
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 2 of 45

1
Plaintiff DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O., contends Defendants have failed to lay any foundation
2
whatsoever for any of the over 1,000 pages of documents or deposition transcripts which they attach as
3
exhibits to their Motion. “It is well settled that only admissible evidence may be considered by the trial
4
court in ruling on a motion for summary judgment.” Beyene v. Coleman Sec. Services, Inc., 854 F.2d
5
1179, 1181-1182 (9th Cir. 1988) (citing to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(e)). A proper foundation must be established
6
for documents used to support or oppose summary judgment motions. Orr v. Bank of America, NT & SA
7
(9th Cir. 2002) 285 F3d 764, 778. As with other documentary evidence, discovery documents must be
8
properly authenticated (e.g., by affidavit or declaration establishing accuracy of copy attached). Id. at
9
774. A portion of a deposition transcript must be properly authenticated by showing the deponent’s
10
name and attaching the court reporter’s certification. Ibid.
11
In submitting their Motion, Defendants have failed to lay any foundation whatsoever for any of
12
the over 1,000 pages of documents or deposition transcripts which they attach as exhibits to their
13
Motion. Other than 5 “sham” declarations intended only to controvert sworn deposition testimony,
14
Defendants have failed to submit a single affidavit or declaration. The deposition transcripts are
15
condensed transcripts intended only for informal attorney use which are not accompanied by reporter
16
certifications. Plaintiff separately submits evidentiary objections to Defendants’ Motion.
17
The complete absence of admissible evidence justifies denial of Defendants’ Motion.
18
Plaintiff hereby submits the following additional objections to, and moves to strike all, evidence
19
submitted by Defendants in support of their Motion for Summary Judgment, including the following:
20
Δ’s MATERIAL FACT Δ’s EVID. Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE
21
1. First Employment Contract between DFJ00025- None.
22 Kern Medical Center (hereinafter 00046
referred to as KMC) and David F.
23 Jadwin, D.O. (hereinafter referred to
as Jadwin) entered into on October 24,
24 2000.
25 2. Employment Verification letter of DFJ00358 None.
3/3/05 (giving original date of hire as
26 December 3, 2000).
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 2
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 3 of 45

1 3. Memo from Bryan to Jadwin dated 0000202- Lacks foundation. Document not
8/14/01 (showing Jadwin received the 203 authenticated. Document not complete –
2 Medical Staff Bylaws). wrong bylaws effective as of 12/13/04
attached.
3
4. Medical Staff Bylaws, approved as 0000272- None.
4 of 12/13/04. 358

5 5. Exhibit A to Employment Contract DFJ00046 Lacks foundation. Document not


(stating responsibilities and duties of authenticated. Document not complete, the
6 the pathology dept. chair are set out in exhibit is provided without the contract.
the KMC Medical Staff Bylaws,
7 sections 6. through 6.4-3). Hearsay. Best evidence rule.

8 6. Second Employment Contract 0001479- None.


between KMC and Jadwin was 1499
9 effective October 5, 2002.
10 a) Exhibit A to the Second None.
Employment Contract: Job
11 Description, David F. Jadwin, M.D.,
Pathology Chairman.
12
7. Letter to Peter Bryan (hereinafter DFJ00723 Document not complete, second page is
13 referred to as Bryan) from Jadwin, missing.
dated 1/9/06, requesting
14 administrative leave with pay until
hostile environment is corrected. He
15 demanded action on 1) sending
transfusion Product Chart Copies
16 (hereinafter referred to as PCCs) to the
blood bank; 2) KMC’s alleged lack of
17 compliance with their weekly
oncology conferences by reporting
18 themselves (KMC) to the American
College of Surgeons (hereinafter
19 referred to as ACS); 3) reviewing time
limits on pathology presentations; and
20 4) implementing protocol of collection
of Fine Needle Aspiration (hereinafter
21 referred to as FNA) specimens.
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 3
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 4 of 45

1 7A. Dutt recalled Jadwin’s threat of Dutt Depo., The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
taking a leave of absence until the 8/20/08, certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
2 medical staff and the administration pgs. 52:5- informal attorney use. No reporter certification
apologized to him. 53: 18 is attached to the transcript.
3 Improper Speculation as to Plaintiff’s intent.

4 Misstates the testimony. Dutt was speculating:

5 Q. He told you, I'm going to take a leave of


absence to pressure the administration to
6 apologize?
A. What he said was I'm going to take a leave
7 of absence. That occurred in the context where
he was upset about a letter he had received
8 regarding the October tumor conference, and
he kept saying all I want is an apology.
9 Q. So he didn't say the exact words I'm going
to take a leave absence in order to force the
10 administration to give me an apology? Is that
what he said?
11 A. He didn't use those exact words.
[Lee Opp. Decl., Exh. 47 (Dutt depo, 52:16-
12 23)]
[…]
13 A. I think he was trying to -- he thought he
could pressure the medical staff and the
14 administration into giving him an apology. All
he wanted was an apology.
15 [Id. at 53:8-10]
8. Plaintiff’s email to/from medical DFJ02422- Irrelevant and immaterial.
16 executive recruiters in January 2006. 2459

17 a) “You know, I wish I could go back Jadwin The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
because I enjoyed that job. I Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
18 mentioned multiple times during my 10/21/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
recruitment and elsewhere that that pg. 1087:9- is attached to the transcript.
19 was the last position that I wanted to 17
take, that I saw myself retiring out of Irrelevant and immaterial.
20 that position and not moving. And I
was very disappointed when-when
21 things-when people that were in a
position to do the right thing didn’t do
22 the right thing.”

23 9. Sandi Chester effectively refutes Chester The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
any argument that Jadwin’s letter to Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
24 Peter Bryan of January 9, 2006 was 8/28/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
notice to KMC that Jadwin needed pgs. is attached to the transcript.
25 medical leave or that, by implication, 135:12137:
Jadwin was absolved of the 6 Pg. Testimony lacks foundation. Improper legal
26 responsibility to notify HR that he was 136:17-18 conclusion as to notice and responsibility to
taking a leave of absence. As Sandi notify HR re leave of absence. Improper
27 Chester said “I mean, anybody can opinion testimony.
write a letter.”
28 Irrelevant and immaterial.

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 4
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 5 of 45

1 10. Certification of Health Care DFJ00726 None.


Provider dated 1/13/06 for Jadwin.
2 Includes the duration of the medical
condition (2-3 months) and the
3 expected date to return to work
(3/16/06). It gives the date the medical
4 condition commenced as 12/16/05.

5 11. Jadwin did not communicate with Chester The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
Human Resources (hereinafter Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
6 referred to as HR) at all, HR 8/28/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
discovered that Jadwin ------ had pgs. 75:19- is attached to the transcript.
7 unilaterally assigned himself to 1 to 2 76:10
workdays per week but, per policy, an Misstates the testimony in all respects.
8 employee must use vacation, sick
time, or leave of absence when not Irrelevant and immaterial.
9 working full-time. It was HR that
brought Jadwin into compliance with
10 County policy by putting him on leave
of absence.
11
12. KMC had to designate Jadwin’s Bryan The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
12 medical leave retroactively because Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
Jadwin was late in giving appropriate 8/14/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
13 requests. pgs. 195:9- is attached to the transcript.
196: 14
14 Irrelevant and immaterial.
13. Jadwin’s submission of his Chester The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
15 healthcare provider’s certification was Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
not timely and was only provided 8/28/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
16 upon prompting from HR. pgs. 113 is attached to the transcript.
:23- 114: 12
17 Lacks foundation. Speculative as to who put
Plaintiff on leave and whether self-imposed.
18
Irrelevant and immaterial.
19 14. Certification of Health Care DFJ01150 None.
Provider, dated 4/26/06, stating that
20 Jadwin’s medical condition goes back
to 10/30/03. The Certification states
21 that Jadwin requires “part-time or less
to avoid worsening of his serious
22 medical condition.”
23 15. Jadwin’s Request for Leave of DFJ00746 None.
Absence (hereinafter referred to as
24 LOA), dated 3/2/06, notes that the
LOA started on 12/16/05.
25
26
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 5
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 6 of 45

1 16. KMC’s responsive document to DFJ00747- Irrelevant and immaterial.


the LOA request, dated 3/2/06, 748
2 indicating that the leave ends on
3/15/06 and stating “ ... have the right
3 to be reinstated to the same or an
equivalent job with the same pay,
4 benefits and terms and conditions of
employment.”
5
17. E-mails dated 3/16/06. One to DFJ00752- None.
6 Peter Bryan from Jadwin telling him 753
that he (Jadwin) will take Bryan’s
7 suggestion to take 2-3 months
additional leave; the other to Dr.
8 Kercher from Jadwin telling him that
he (Jadwin) is having surgery and will
9 I need 2-3 months of additional leave
for the surgery and requesting
10 apologies from Dr. Ragland
(President-elect), Dr. Abraham and
11 Dr. Taylor and an investigation into
Dr. Roy.
12
18. Notice from Human Resources to DFJ00796 Irrelevant and immaterial.
13 Jadwin, dated 4/20/06, that his leave
of absence expired on 3/15/06.
14
19. Jadwin’s request for Leave of DFJ01158 Irrelevant and immaterial to Defendants'
15 Absence Extension, dated 4/26/06, has argument that Plaintiff failed to give notice of
a starting date of 3/15/06 and an his need for extension of medical leave prior to
16 ending date of 9/16/06. being placed on Forced FT Leave by Bryan as
of 4/28/06. Irrelevant to excusing Defendant's
17 liability under any of Plaintiff's counts.
18 20. Memo from Bryan to Jadwin, DFJ01121 None.
dated 4/28/06, notifying him that his
19 leave would be up on 6/16/06 and he
either returns fulltime or resigns. Also,
20 it notes that Jadwin was provided a
medical leave history, along with the
21 calculations and policies about his
medical leave.
22
21. Bryan noted that he gave the Bryan The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
23 option to Jadwin whether to go on Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
full-time leave, although full-time 8/14/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
24 leave was preferable to Bryan. Bryan pgs. 250: is attached to the transcript.
asserts that it was Jadwin’s decision to 15- 251:6,
25 go on fulltime leave and that Jadwin Exhibit 303
never communicated with Bryan any
26 contrary intent.
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 6
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 7 of 45

1 22. Memo from Bryan to Jadwin dated Bryan The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
4/28/06, summarizing a meeting held Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
2 with Bryan, Karen Barnes, Steve 8114/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
O’Connor, and Jadwin. The meeting pgs. is attached to the transcript.
3 was held to “insure that [Jadwin] had 240:9244: 2,
all information available concerning Exhibit 303
4 his status and what was possible and pg 243 :22-
not possible according to County 25
5 policies for leaves of absence.” It was pg.244:1-2
not a disciplinary meeting.
6
23. A letter to Bryan from Jadwin, Bryan The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
7 dated May 31, 2006, where Jadwin Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
requests more time to make the 8/14/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
8 decision by June 16th of whether to pgs. is attached to the transcript.
return full-time or resign. Bryan did 248:16249:
9 not have the authority to make an 9 Exhibit Improper legal conclusion. Improper opinion.
exception to County policy by 311
10 extending leave beyond the maximum
period granted for leave. Jadwin
11 wasn’t being asked to return full-time
on June 16th, he just had to give his
12 decision to return full-time by June
16th. He did not do that.
13
24. Letter from Peter Bryan to Jadwin, DFJ01141 None.
14 dated 6/14/06, granting him Personal
Necessity Leave of 90 days, pursuant
15 to Rule 1202.2, but only for his
employment with KMC, not for his
16 position as pathology department
chair.
17
25. Bryan artfully explained why the Bryan The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
18 Chair of the Department of Pathology Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
needs to be present full-time. “It’s not 8/14/08, pg. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
19 just the task orientation of handling a 216:3·22. is attached to the transcript.
duty. It’s being present within the
20 organization to influence the Speculation as to what is “inferred” in a
organization’s policies and practices. position being “full-time”.
21 Organizations tend to drift without the
constancy of leadership, because that
22 is part of what a leader does is monitor
the performance to ensure things stay
23 on track, and without that constant
dialogue present, you can find
24 yourself getting off track. In the
medical arena when patient care is
25 involved, you don’t allow it to get to
the point where you don’t have the
26 leadership necessary. So that’s
inferred in it being a full-time
27 position.”
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 7
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 8 of 45

1 a) Responsibilities and duties of the DFJ00046 Lacks foundation. Document not


pathology dept. chair are set out in the authenticated. Document not complete, the
2 KMC Medical Staff Bylaws, sections exhibit is provided without the contract.
6. through 6.4-3.
3 Hearsay. Best evidence rule.

4 26. Mortgage verification of DFJ01343 No foundation. Unauthenticated. Hearsay.


employment for Jadwin, dated
5 6/22/06, noting that the probability of Irrelevant and immaterial.
continued employment for Jadwin was
6 good and he was okay to return to
work when well.
7
27. Letter from Dr. Harris (writing on 0001424 No foundation. Unauthenticated.
8 behalf of Bryan) to Jadwin, dated
6/26/06, stating that he (Jadwin) has
9 been seen in and around KMC and
that while he (Jadwin) is on leave, he
10 is not to enter the hospital except for
seeking medical attention. He is also
11 not to contact any employee or faculty
member of KMC while on leave.
12
28. In his letter of June 14, 2006, Bryan The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
13 Bryan notifies Jadwin that Jadwin will Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
be removed as chair and tells Jadwin 8/14/08, pg. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
14 to call him if he has questions. Bryan 257:9-15 is attached to the transcript.
states that put the burden of
15 challenging the action or asking for Improper conclusion as to burden. Improper
reconsideration on Jadwin who never opinion.
16 called him about the letter.
17 29. According to Exhibit 303, Bryan The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
Jadwin’s leave and all allowances by Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
18 the County expired by June 16th. 8/14/08, pg. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
After that date, Bryan had no authority 244:6-16 is attached to the transcript.
19 to extend Jadwin’s employment
relationship. Improper legal conclusion. Improper opinion.
20
30. By June 2006, Jadwin had fully Bryan The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
21 exhausted his rights and the Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
institutional obligation to grant him 8/14/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
22 medical leave. pgs. is attached to the transcript.
280:21281:
23 4 Improper legal conclusion. Improper opinion.
24 31. Adherence to the Medical Staff Bryan The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
Bylaws afforded Jadwin the due Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
25 process that he was entitled to. 8/14/08, pg. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
258:7-16 is attached to the transcript.
26
Improper legal conclusion. Improper opinion.
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 8
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 9 of 45

1 32. Tort Claims Act Complaint, dated Exhibit 2 to Irrelevant and immaterial.
7/3/06, Jadwin admits that he had used Second
2 up his CFRA leave by June 14th, Amended Improper legal conclusion.
2006. Page 1 of the Attachment (page Complaint
3 3 of the entire complaint), Section A,
paragraph 1, last sentence reads “As of
4 June 14, 2006, Complainant had taken
12 weeks of CFRA sick leave and
5 approximately 3-4 weeks of County
sick leave based on doctor’s
6 certifications which he submitted.”

7 33. Memorandum to the Joint 0001476- Misstates evidence. JCC minutes state only
Conference Committee (JCC) from 1565 that the JCC voted on Bryan’s
8 Bryan, dated 7/10106, recommending 0000073-75 recommendation for demotion and approved it.
that the Committee approve the There is no disclosure of the JCC’s reasons for
9 demotion of Jadwin from chair of the their vote.
pathology department to staff [Lee Decl., Exh. 17 (JCC Minutes of 7/10/06
10 pathologist. “This recommendation to at Item 10 on Bates 0009820-9821)].
rescind Dr. Jadwin’s appointment as
11 Chairman, Department of Pathology,
is based solely on his continued non-
12 availability to provide the leadership
necessary for a contributing member
13 of the medical staff leadership group.
KMC must have its key personnel
14 available, and Dr. Jadwin has provided
no indication that he is committed to
15 return to work or resume his duties as
chairman.” Also, “Dr. Jadwin has
16 made no attempt to contact me
concerning my decision to relieve him
17 of his chairman duties nor has he
indicated any desire to negotiate a new
18 contract.” JCC meeting minutes
confirm that the committee took
19 Bryan’s advice and they did it for the
reason that he gave in his
20 memorandum.

21 34. Ray Watson (hereinafter referred Watson The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
to as Watson) testified that he only Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
22 remembers a discussion on removing 8125/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
Jadwin from the department chair pgs. 13:17- is attached to the transcript.
23 position; he was quite clear (and he 14:14
was asked three times) that he did not Misstates testimony.
24 remember any discussion about
Jadwin’s “termination.” He
25 affirmatively stated that he knew of no
discussions about Jadwin resigning or
26 being denied privileges.

27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 9
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 10 of 45

1 35. Watson testified that he became Watson The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
aware that Jadwin’s contract was not Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
2 renewed although he could not give a 8/25/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
timeline as to when things happened. pgs. 28:6- is attached to the transcript.
3 He also testified strongly that he does 30:23
not recall a vote taken on the Misstates testimony, Watson did not testify
4 nonrenewal “although [he] imagine[s] “strongly” that he didn’t recall a vote.
it was,”
5
36. Watson testified that the fact that Watson The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
6 Jadwin was suing KMC was brought Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
up in discussions of whether to renew 8/25/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
7 Jadwin’s contract although he would pgs. is attached to the transcript.
not say it was a consideration, only 110:12112:
8 that it was discussed. In addition, it 13 Misstates testimony. Watson answered the
became obvious after a few questions question affirmatively. He never denied that
9 that Watson was confused about the Plaintiff’s lawsuit was a consideration for the
sequence of events which can lead to Nonrenewal. In fact, in later testimony,
10 the inference that he does not recall Watson volunteers that Plaintiff’s lawsuit was
anything specifically or correctly. a “reason” for the Nonrenewal.
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 10
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 11 of 45

1 a) Kern County Board of Supervisors Decl. of Rubio Decl.: Para. 1: Lacks foundation as to
did not discuss the non-renewal of Michael dates of attendance at JCC meetings. Para. 2:
2 Jadwin’s employment agreement or Rubio, Speculation as to Plaintiff’s being “upset”.
made any decisions regarding the non- 11/10/08, Improper conclusions and speculation
3 renewal of the employment ¶2; Decl. of regarding Board of Supervisors’ discussions,
agreement. The subject never came Raymond decisions re Plaintiff’s agreement.
4 before the Board of Supervisors. Watson,
11/10/08, Watson Decl.: Para. 2 & 3: Sham declaration
5 ¶¶3, 4 and that contradicts sworn deposition testimony
5; Decl. of after the fact that the JCC did in fact make a
6 Mike decision not to renew Plaintiff’s contract. [Lee
Maggard, Opp. Decl., Exh. 10 (Watson Depo. at 30:10-
7 11/10/08, 13; 110:12-111:5; 111:15-24; 113:15-114:4)].
¶2; Decl. of A party cannot create an issue of fact by a
8 Jon declaration contradicting his or her own
McQuiston, deposition or other sworn testimony. See Block
9 11/10/08, v. City of Los Angeles (9th Cir. 2001) 253 F3d
¶2; Decl. of 410, 419, fn. 2. The same rule applies to
10 Don Maben, postdeposition affidavits that contradict the
11/10/08, ¶2 affiant’s deposition testimony. Aerel, S.R.L. v.
11 PCC Airfoils, LLC (6th Cir. 2006) 448 F3d
899, 907–908; Bank of Ill. v. Allied Signal
12 Safety Restraint Systems (7th Cir. 1996) 75
F3d 1162, 1169. Para. 4: Improper conclusions
13 and speculation regarding Board of
Supervisors’ discussions, decisions.
14
Maggard Decl.: Para. 1: Lacks foundation as
15 to dates of attendance at JCC meetings. Para.
2: Speculation as to Plaintiff’s being “upset”.
16 Improper conclusions and speculation
regarding Board of Supervisors’ discussions,
17 decisions re: Plaintiff’s agreement.

18 Maben Decl.: Para. 1: Lacks foundation as to


dates of attendance at JCC meetings. Para. 2:
19 Speculation as to Plaintiff’s being “upset”.
Improper conclusions and speculation
20 regarding Board of Supervisors’ discussions,
decisions re: Plaintiff’s agreement.
21
McQuiston Decl.: Para. 1: Lacks foundation
22 as to dates of attendance at JCC meetings.
Para. 2: Speculation as to Plaintiff’s being
23 “upset”. Improper conclusions and
speculation regarding Board of Supervisors’
24 discussions, decisions re: Plaintiff’s
agreement.
25
26
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 11
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 12 of 45

1 37. Letter from Karen Barnes DFJ01359- Hearsay. Best evidence rule.
(hereinafter referred to as Barnes) to 1361
2 Plaintiffs attorney Eugene Lee, dated
7118/06, in which she mentions (pg.
3 2) that Jadwin was removed as
pathology department chair on 7/10/06
4 at a regularly scheduled meeting of the
Joint Conference Committee, pursuant
5 to Bylaws article IX, section 9.7-4
“removal of a department chair may
6 occur with or without cause ... “

7 38. Plaintiffs’ attorney Eugene Lee Bryan Irrelevant, immaterial, and is an improper legal
agrees that Jadwin was not removed as Depo., conclusion.
8 chair during his medical leave. 8/14/08, pg.
222:8-13 The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
9 certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
informal attorney use. No reporter certification
10 is attached to the transcript.

11 Lacks foundation. Hearsay. A deposition


question is not evidence, particularly when its
12 purpose is solely to elicit testimony from a
deponent.
13 39. Letter to Dr. Harris from Jadwin, DFJ01388- None.
dated 9111/06, stating that he (Jadwin) 1389
14 will be returning to work on 9/18/06
and enclosed was a doctor’s
15 certification that he was able to return
to work full-time.
16
40. Letter from David Culberson to DFJ01398 None.
17 Jadwin, dated 9/20/06, explaining the
reasons for reduction in pay.
18
41. Letter from David Culberson to DFJ01482 None.
19 Jadwin, dated 12/7/06, putting Jadwin
on administrative leave with pay and
20 confining him to his home during
business hours, pursuant to Kern
21 County Policy and Administrative
Procedures Manual section 124.3.
22
a) Kern County Policy and 0016941 Incomplete document – Bates 0016940 and
23 Administrative Procedures Manual, 16943 were omitted. Bates 0016940
pg. 1:22, Section titled establishes that Defendant County can only put
24 “Administrative Leave with Pay.” an employee on administrative leave for “good
“During the administrative leave, the cause”.
25 employee shall be ordered to remain at [Lee Opp. Decl., Exh. 19 (Kern County Policy
home and available by telephone ... “. & Administrative Procedures Manual at
26 Section 139 (Disciplinary Actions) and 139.6
(Administrative Leave with Pay) on Bates
27 0016940-16941)].
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 12
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 13 of 45

1 42. Letter from Mark Wasser to DFJ01701 Irrelevant and immaterial to excusing
Eugene Lee, dated 4/30/07, allowing Defendants' liability under any of Plaintiff's
2 Jadwin to pursue his own activities counts, as evidenced by Defendants' failure to
during the work week and retaining cite to this DMF anywhere in their motion
3 him, at his usual salary, for consulting. brief (Doc. 29).

4 Misstates evidence.
43. Letter to Mark Wasser from DFJ01703- None.
5 Eugene Lee, dated 5/1/07, noting that 1704
on 4/28/07 and in several following e-
6 mails he was notified that KMC
wanted to terminate Jadwin’s contract
7 and would not renew it on 10/4/07.

8 44. Exhibit 644 is an e-mail with an Jadwin The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
amendment attached to it. The Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
9 amendment is a contract amendment 3/12/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
which Jadwin had to sign before pgs. 969:1- is attached to the transcript.
10 returning to work. Exhibit 581 is also 974:2
the same contract amendment (Exhibits Lacks foundation. Improper speculation.
11 although Exhibit 581 is signed. There 644 and Plaintiff’s testimony that he spoke with his
are differences between Exhibit 644 581) attorney regarding his disagreement about the
12 and 581, in subparagraphs “h” and “i”. pay reduction invades attorney-client
Jadwin confirmed that he had privileged communication, a privilege which is
13 discussions with his attorney about the never waived, and is inadmissible.
amendment; Jadwin does not know if
14 his attorney negotiated any of the
terms in it. Jadwin does not know if
15 his attorney made proposals to KMC
with suggested changes in the
16 language of the amendment. Jadwin
was aware of the changes at the time
17 they occurred but he does not recall
how the changes came about. One
18 change that Jadwin recalls talking
about is the cut in his salary which he
19 didn’t agree with.

20 45. The last two pages of Exhibit 581 Jadwin The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
is Exhibit A which is a job Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
21 description. Jadwin confirms that he 3/12/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
read it at the time of signing the 974:3~976:l is attached to the transcript.
22 amendment. Jadwin looked at the 2
tasks listed and does not believe that Improper legal conclusion. Vague and
23 any of those tasks require ambiguous.
accommodation. Jadwin does not
24 recall asking anyone with the County
for an accommodation of any of the
25 tasks listed in Exhibit A.
26
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 13
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 14 of 45

1 46. Jadwin testified that he wanted his Jadwin The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
employment contract renewed, but Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
2 when presented with the fact that his 10/21/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
employment contract in place at the pg. 1011: is attached to the transcript.
3 time of nonrenewal contained his 161016: 19
reduced salary, he denied wanting to Misstates testimony. Plaintiff was testifying
4 renew that contract. that he viewed the Paycut Amendment of
7/10/06 as retaliatory. This testimony had
5 nothing to do with nonrenewal. It was also
outside the scope of Judge Wanger’s order
6 (Doc. 245:3:5-6), which limited the scope of
discovery at that time only to the Plaintiff’s
7 new nonrenewal-related claims.
47. Jadwin said that the contract he Jadwin The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
8 wanted renewed was his Department Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
Chair contract. 10/21/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
9 pgs. is attached to the transcript.
1032:16-
10 1033: 3; pg. Improper speculation. Misstates testimony.
1043:12-20 Plaintiff was testifying as to his desires and
11 wants were as of 10/7/08, not as of the time his
contract expired over a year earlier on 10/4/07.
12 [Lee Opp. Decl., Exh. 6 (Jadwin Depo at
1034:13-1035:9; 1036:7-11; 1041:5-9; 1044:2-
13 3; 1060:4-7)].

14 JADWIN’S ALLEGATIONS OF
REGULATORY VIOLATIONS
15
48. Approved Cancer Program 0000623- No foundation. No authentication. Hearsay.
16 Performance Report for KMC, dated 630
7/14/04, with a rating of “I “meaning
17 KMC’s Cancer program-including
number of meetings-is approved for
18 three years with commendation.
19 49. Exchange of e-mails between Toni 0000421- Irrelevant and immaterial to excusing
Smith and Jadwin, dated 6115/05, 424 Defendants' liability under any of Plaintiff's
20 about the PCC issues. In 0000423, counts, as evidenced by Defendants' failure to
Jadwin states that a PCC must not be cite to this DMF anywhere in their motion
21 signed until the time of the infusion, brief (Doc. 29).
or KMC is not meeting American
22 Association of Blood Banks’
(hereinafter referred to as AABB)
23 accreditation standards.
24 50. Typed notes, dated 1/10106, of 0000575 Irrelevant to excusing Defendants’ liability
25 interviews done to rebut Jadwin’s under any of Plaintiff’s counts, as evidenced
claim that the meeting frequency by Defendants’ failure to cite this DMF
26 standard set by the American College anywhere in their motion brief (Doc. 262).
of Surgeons (hereinafter referred to as
27 ACS) was not being met at KMC. No foundation. No authentication. Hearsay.

28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 14
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 15 of 45

1 51. In meeting on 2/22/06, Jadwin 0000578 No foundation. No authentication. Hearsay.


alleges that KMC is not meeting the Misstates evidence. Improper conclusion as to
2 ACS standard for frequency of staff “rebutted”.
meetings; was rebutted during the
3 meeting that KMC is meeting standard
based on 2 surveys and paperwork.
4
52. In an e-mail to Peter Bryan dated DFJ00784 None.
5 4/10/06, Jadwin brings up non-
compliance with state regulations,
6 Joint Commission for the
Accreditation of Hospital
7 Organizations (hereinafter referred to
as JCAHO), and AABB on the issues
8 of the PCCs.

9 53. Notes of meeting with Peter DFJ00788 Irrelevant and immaterial to excusing
Bryan, Karen Barnes and Jadwin on Defendants’ liability under any of Plaintiff’s
10 4/13/06. There is no problem with the counts, as evidenced by Defendants’ failure to
PCCs because 5 charts were reviewed cite this DMF anywhere in their motion brief
11 (and approved) by JCAHO. (Doc. 262).

12 No foundation. No authentication. Hearsay.


Misstates the evidence.
13 54. E-mail to Peter Bryan from DFJ00793 None.
Jadwin, dated 4/17/06, claiming that
14 the JCAHO review was too small of a
sample so KMC was not in
15 compliance on their handling of the
PCCs and there was a need for action.
16
55. Gilbert Martinez, the Laboratory Martinez The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
17 manager, recalls Jadwin telling him Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
before Thanksgiving in 2006 to 4/16/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
18 prepare the laboratory for possible pgs. 111: is attached to the transcript.
inspections (so sometime before 12-118: 22
19 11122/06). He does not recall if Misstates testimony regarding “confide”
Jadwin told him how Jadwin might whistleblowing.
20 know about it. He remembers
inspectors coming in from the
21 California Dept. of Health Services
(hereinafter referred to as DHS) and
22 receiving written inquiries from the
CAP. These inspections occurred
23 several months after Jadwin had
mentioned it. Jadwin did not “confide”
24 in him or tell him that the inspections
were happening because of
25 whistleblowing by Jadwin.
26
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 15
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 16 of 45

1 a) CAP conducts routine inspections, Martinez The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
unannounced, on a known periodic Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
2 basis. 4/16/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
pgs. 118:23- is attached to the transcript.
3 120: 19
Misstates testimony.
4
56. Jadwin first reported concerns to No supporting evidence submitted.
5 JCAHO, CAP, and DHS in November
28, 2006 (more than five years after
6 noticing alleged violations).

7 a) Actual complaint filed with JCAHO DFJ02540- None.


by Jadwin. 2541
8
b) E-mail from JCAHO to Jadwin, DFJ01454 None.
9 dated 11/29/06, acknowledging receipt
of complaint about KMC.
10
c) Letter from DHS to Jadwin, dated DFJ01459 None.
11 12/1/06, acknowledging receipt of
complaint.
12
57. E-mail to JCAHO from Jadwin, DFJ02538- Irrelevant to excusing Defendants’ liability
13 dated 12/8/06, wanting to talk with the 2539 under any of Plaintiff’s counts, as evidenced
JCAHO investigator and requesting by Defendants’ failure to cite this DMF
14 quickness on the investigation because anywhere in their motion brief (Doc. 262).
KMC might be covering up
15 noncompliance evidence. He brings up Misstates evidence.
the issue of skull flaps being stored
16 on-site.
17 58. Letter to KMC from Jadwin dated 0001455- None.
12/13/06 notifying hospital 1458
18 administration that he has notified
governmental and enforcement
19 agencies of alleged violations.
20 59. Letter from Dr. Dutt to Gerald 0020278 Irrelevant to excusing Defendants’ liability
Hoeltge of the CAP, dated 1/11/07, under any of Plaintiff’s counts, as evidenced
21 telling him that Jadwin had never by Defendants’ failure to cite this DMF
informed him (Dutt) that some tissue anywhere in their motion brief (Doc. 262).
22 handling and storage was occurring
but the situation has been taken care No foundation. No authentication. Hearsay.
23 of. Speculation. Improper conclusion. Improper
opinion.
24 60. Letter to Dr. Dutt from CAP, dated 0020279 Irrelevant to excusing Defendants’ liability
3/22/07, informing him that the KMC under any of Plaintiff’s counts, as evidenced
25 laboratory continues to be in by Defendants’ failure to cite this DMF
compliance with the CAP Standards anywhere in their motion brief (Doc. 262).
26 for Laboratory Accreditation.
No foundation. No authentication. Hearsay.
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 16
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 17 of 45

1 61. Dr. Dutt believed that Jadwin, Dutt Depo., Irrelevant to excusing Defendants’ liability
after returning from leave, might be 8/20/08, pg. under any of Plaintiff’s counts, as evidenced
2 intentionally issuing wrong opinions 296: 10- 19 by Defendants’ failure to cite this DMF
to prove he was a whistleblower. anywhere in their motion brief (Doc. 262).
3
The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
4 certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
informal attorney use. No reporter certification
5 is attached to the transcript.

6 No foundation. Hearsay. Improper speculation.


Improper conclusion.
7
DEPRESSION DISABILITY,
8 REASONABLE
9 ACCOMMODATION,
INTERACTIVE PROCESS
10 62. Jadwin described his disability as Jadwin The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
severe depression, manifested by a Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
11 lack of ability to concentrate; loss 1/9/08, pgs. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
DFJ0y in his work; extreme anxiety 414:24418: is attached to the transcript.
12 and difficulty sleeping. Jadwin 12
testified that he told Dr. Kolb, during a
13 meeting he had with him in 2003, that
he was depressed. Jadwin thought this
14 meeting was a one-on-one weekly
meeting that each department chair
15 had with Dr. Kolb. Jadwin said that
Dr. Kolb must have noticed that he
16 was depressed because he would often
ask him if he was alright.
17
63. Jadwin told Dr. Kolb that he Jadwin The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
18 suffered from depression when he Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
notified him of the weekly half-day 1/9108, pgs. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
19 medical leave day off to see his 491:1- is attached to the transcript.
therapist. 493:17
20
64. Jadwin asked Dr. Kolb for Jadwin The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
21 accommodations for his disability by Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
requesting time off for his therapist 1/9108, pgs. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
22 visits. Dr. Kolb granted that 506: 16- is attached to the transcript.
accommodation. 507: 1
23
65. Jadwin had an episode of Jadwin The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
24 depression in the 1990s before coming Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
to work at KMC. Jadwin affirmed his 1/9/08, pgs. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
25 earlier testimony that his recent 452:4- is attached to the transcript.
depression started in 2002 or 2003. 455:19 Pg.
26 Jadwin said that he was taking weekly 455:8-13 Improper medical conclusion re depression.
half-day leaves starting in or about Misstates testimony regarding reasons for
27 2003 and he told Dr. Kolb it was feeling depressed.
because of his problems with
28 radiology and others.

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 17
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 18 of 45

1 66. Bryan does not recall Jadwin Bryan The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
mentioning to him about depression, Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
2 sleeplessness, etc. nor did Bryan 8/14/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
notice behavior that he would call pgs. 111: is attached to the transcript.
3 mental illness. 12-113: 2
and 128:16-
4 129:3

5 67. Jadwin only discussed his Jadwin Irrelevant and immaterial in that employer
disability with Dr. Kolb. When asked Depo., does not need to know an employee's
6 whether he had ever told Peter Bryan, 3/12/08, diagnosis, only an employee's limitations, to
Jadwin said that subsequently during pgs. 976: have notice of an employee's disability.
7 one-on-one meetings with Bryan he 13983: 2
had mentioned being depressed by lines 977:5- The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
8 lack of action on the concerns Jadwin 8 and lines certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
was raising. When pressed on whether 977:24- informal attorney use. No reporter certification
9 he had ever actually told Peter Bryan 978:8 and is attached to the transcript.
he was disabled, Jadwin said that in lines 981:
10 late 2005 or early 2006, he told Bryan 17-982: 1 Misstates testimony.
that sometimes he was so depressed he and lines
11 couldn’t work at KMC anymore until 982: 18-24
it fixed some of his concerns. Jadwin lines 978:
12 said that he also told Dr. Yoo, head of 15-979:1
psychiatry, that he was depressed from lines
13 working at the hospital. Jadwin does 979:24-
not recall talking to Dr. Dutt about this 980:8 lines
14 issue. Jadwin could not recall any 982:9-24
other people at KMC that he talked to
15 about his disability. In fact, Jadwin
would not use the term “disabled” just
16 that he could not work there.

17 68. When asked what considerations Jadwin The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
there were in renewing a contract with Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
18 KMC, Jadwin replied “All of the 10/21/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
working environment situations. The pgs. is attached to the transcript.
19 patient quality issues, the 1055:13-
administration, what-what type of 1056: 15 Improper speculation. Misstates testimony.
20 administrative operation is there. The Irrelevant an immaterial. Plaintiff was
emphasis on quality, interest in testifying as to his desires and wants were as
21 quality. Interest in patient safety. The of 10/7/08, not as of the time his contract
collaborative working environment. expired over a year earlier on 10/4/07. [Lee
22 Are the other physicians going to be Opp. Decl., Exh. 6 (Jadwin Depo at 1034:13-
responsible in working for the 1035:9; 1036:7-11; 1041:5-9; 1044:2-3;
23 betterment of patient care, or are they 1060:4-7)].
just going to be working for their own
24 self-interest.”

25
JADWIN’S ERRORS
26 Failure to Produce Timely or
27 Correct Diagnoses

28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 18
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 19 of 45

1 69. Dr. Ragland brings up the issue Ragland Irrelevant and immaterial.
that a stack of FNA reports that Depo.,
2 Jadwin had given him had issue dates 8/22/08, The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
after the date of a double read, in each pgs. 171 :5- certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
3 case, was done by UCLA. This raises 172:5 and informal attorney use. No reporter certification
the possibility that Jadwin waited to 328:7-329: is attached to the transcript.
4 enter a diagnosis until the double read 14
had come back from UCLA so that he Improper speculation. Improper opinion.
5 could be in 100% agreement with Improper conclusion. No foundation. Misstates
UCLA. testimony.
6
70. Letter from Dr. Ang to Dr. Perez, 0000690- Relevance.
7 Peter Bryan, Dr. Kolb, and Dr. 691,
Munoz, dated 2/20102, containing 0000736 No foundation. No authentication. Hearsay.
8 formal complaints of misconduct
against Jadwin. Complaint #3 states
9 that Jadwin failed to pass the quarterly
proficiency tests on cervical pap
10 smears so those tests are sent out. It
states that this was an unnecessary
11 cost and delay because the other three
pathologists in the department could
12 examine the pap smears because they
have maintained their proficiency.
13
a) Document asserting Jadwin’s 0000737 Irrelevant and immaterial to excusing
14 failing test scores and the fact that the Defendants' liability under any of Plaintiff's
Department of Pathology has not been counts. No foundation. No authentication.
15 sued for medical malpractice in 23 Hearsay. Misstates the evidence.
years.
16
b) Jadwin’s actual (failing) test for Irrelevant. No foundation. No authentication.
17 cervical pap smears. This test is Hearsay. Misstates the evidence.
conducted by the College of American
18 Pathologists (CAP). Of interest, on
Case #3 Jadwin marked
19 “unsatisfactory for evaluation” when
the accurate diagnosis was “squamous
20 cell carcinoma.”
21 71. Report to Maureen Martin from 0001059- Irrelevant. No foundation. No authentication.
Jadwin, dated 11/20/02, on the results 1072 Hearsay. Misstates the evidence. Improper
22 of the evaluations of the pathologists conclusion.
(Jadwin and Lang) by resident
23 physicians and staff physicians in
surgery. On a three-point scale, where
24 2 means satisfactory and 3 means
needs improvement, Jadwin scored
25 low on timeliness (lower than Lang),
IOC quality, completeness, and clarity
26 of diagnosis. Jadwin blamed
unhappiness of a Dr. Prunes for his
27 low scores.
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 19
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 20 of 45

1 72. Twenty-nine (29) medical reports 0001163- Irrelevant to excusing Defendants' liability for
from 2004 and 2005 with all of the 1310 any of Plaintiff's counts. Misstates evidence.
2 following in common: 1) all are FNA No foundation.
reports; 2) all were processed in-house
3 and then sent to outside labs for
independent diagnosis; and 3) the
4 turn-around time for the final
diagnosis ranged from three weeks to
5 five or six months.

6 73. Letter from Dr. Roy to Jadwin, DFJ00363 Hearsay.


dated 4/15/05, complaining that
7 samples from 2 cases still had not
been analyzed and diagnosed and were
8 over one week late.

9 74. Letter to Dr. Roy from Jadwin, DFJ00364- Relevance.


dated 4/20/05, in response to his 366
10 complaint about late diagnoses. On Hearsay.
page 3 Jadwin writes “Pathology
11 diagnoses are consensus based, with
few gold standards to affirm accuracy.
12 Consultants offer opinions, not
accurate diagnoses. There is no
13 universally agreed upon definition for
what constitutes an ‘accurate’
14 diagnosis.”

15 75. Notes by Dr. Harris, dated 6/8105, 0027066- Relevance.


of a meeting between himself and Dr. 27068
16 Roy in which Dr. Roy again raises his No foundation. No authentication. Hearsay.
concerns with the pathology Misstates the evidence.
17 department.
18 76. Notes by Dr. Harris, dated 7/1/05, 0027069- Relevance.
of a meeting between himself and Dr. 27070
19 Roy. Dr. Roy had specific examples of No foundation. No authentication. Hearsay.
his complaints about the pathology Misstates the evidence.
20 department including three missed
diagnoses and an example-by name
21 and report number--of a pathology
report changed after the fact by
22 Jadwin.
23 77. Letter from Dr. Roy to Jadwin, DFJ00439, Relevance.
dated 7/15/05, responding to Jadwin’s DFJ00437
24 letter to him dated 6/5/05 and stating Hearsay.
that he (Dr. Roy) has raised pathology
25 department mistakes, delays and
discrepancies with Jadwin many times
26 before.
27 78. Phone message from Dr. Roy, 0000506 Relevance.
dated 11/18/05, identifying a patient
28 error by Jadwin. No foundation. No authentication. Hearsay.
Misstates the evidence.

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 20
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 21 of 45

1 79. Letter from Dr. Roy to Dr. Harris, 0000434- Relevance.


dated 2/22/06, identifying 19 cases 476
2 (with medical records backup) where No foundation. Hearsay. Improper conclusion.
KMC pathology department was Improper opinion. Speculation.
3 wrong in their diagnosis, or very late
in getting a diagnosis, or changing an
4 initial wrong diagnosis.

5 a) Pathology Quality Management 0018516 Relevance.


Policy, September 2005, “Correction
6 of significant error must be made No foundation. No authentication. Incomplete
through a corrected report.” document. Hearsay. Misstates the evidence.
7
c) Two letters from Dr. Felix at USC 0000432- Relevance.
8 to Dr. Roy, dated 3115/06 and 433
3/16/06, with diagnoses of samples No foundation. No authentication. Hearsay.
9 that Dr. Roy sent to him. Handwritten Misstates the evidence. Improper conclusion.
notes on bottom of letters describe Speculation. Improper opinion.
10 discrepancy with KMC pathology
diagnosis and that pathology changed
11 its diagnosis in one instance.

12 80. After returning from leave, Jadwin Dutt Depo., Relevance.


had to be told to slow down on regular 8/20/08, pg.
13 case work because he was going too 285 :6-23 The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
fast and making errors. certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
14 informal attorney use. No reporter certification
is attached to the transcript.
15
Other Mistakes
16
81. E-mail from Reyes to Dr. Harris 0000398 Relevance.
17 and Tony Smith, dated 4/17/06,
reporting that Jadwin was making No foundation. No authentication. Hearsay.
18 copies of patient files which is a Title Misstates the evidence.
22 violation.
19
82. Minutes of the meeting of the 0000899 Relevance.
20 pathology/histology department on
10/17/06. It was noted that Dr. Hearsay. Improper speculation. No foundation.
21 Shertukde was concerned that blades
were not being removed once grossing
22 was done. She and Dr. Dutt remove
and discard the blades immediately.
23
83. E-mail from Dr. Dutt to Jadwin, DFJ01449 Relevance.
24 dated 11/22/06, reminding him of a DFJ01446-
rush case that Jadwin failed to process 1447 Hearsay. Speculation. Improper conclusion.
25 promptly and counseling Jadwin to Improper opinion. No foundation.
remember it when criticizing others.
26
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 21
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 22 of 45

1 84. E-mail from Tracy Lindsey to 0000823 Relevance.


Ramona Case, dated 11/27/06, stating
2 that Jadwin had labeled some (9) No foundation. No authentication. Hearsay.
placentas wrong and she gave the Misstates the evidence.
3 incorrect labels alongside the correct
labels.
4
85. E-mail from Dr. Dutt to Yolanda 0000862 Relevance.
5 Figueroa, dated 12/7/06,
acknowledging her report that Jadwin Hearsay. Speculation. Improper conclusion.
6 had left two long blades and a scalpel Improper opinion. No foundation.
out after he was finished.
7
86. Report from Dr. Dutt to Peer 0000882- Relevance.
8 Review Committee, dated 12/14/06, 895
describing with documentation five Hearsay. Speculation. Improper conclusion.
9 mistakes by Jadwin: 1) missed Improper opinion. No foundation.
diagnosis and failure or refusal to seek
10 outside consultation (with backup
letter from Dr. McBride); 2)
11 misdiagnosis of prostate carcinoma
and of prostatic biopsies; 3) missed
12 diagnosis of thyroid microcarcinoma;
4) performance of sternal bone
13 marrow examination; and 5)
assignment of procedures to physician
14 without privileges.

15
JADWIN’S INABILITY TO GET
16 ALONG WITH OR
17 COMMUNICATE WELL WITH
OTHERS
18 Policy
19 87. Policy Statement of the Disruptive 0010685- Relevance.
Behavior, Discrimination & 10688
20 Harassment Policy “It is the policy of
Kern Medical Center that all
21 associates are expected to conduct
themselves at all times while on
22 hospital premises in a courteous,
professional, respectful, collegial, and
23 cooperative manner. This applies to
interactions and communications with
24 or relating to physicians, nursing and
technical personnel, other caregivers,
25 other hospital personnel, ... “
[emphasis added]
26
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 22
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 23 of 45

1 88. Section V Item A of the Kern 0010686- Relevance.


Medical Center Procedure on 10687
2 Disruptive Behavior, Discrimination
and Harassment Policy “Examples of
3 prohibited conduct include but are not
limited to the following ...
4
a) 6. Use of racial, ethnic, epithetic or 0010686 Relevance.
5 derogatory comments...

6 b) 8. Use of medical record entries to 0010686 Relevance.


criticize KMC associates, policies or
7 equipment, other practitioners, or
others;
8
c) 14. Persisting to criticize, or to 0010687 Relevance.
9 discuss performance or quality
concerns with, particular KMC
10 associates or others after being asked
to direct such comments exclusively
11 through other channels; ... “
12 89. Jadwin was dealt with pursuant to Harris The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
the Disruptive Physician Policy. Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
13 8/13/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
pgs. 330:21- is attached to the transcript.
14 332:3
Improper speculation. Misstates testimony.
15 [Lee Opp. Decl., Exh. 24 (Harris Depo at
331:21-332:3)].
16
Pulling Dr. Lau’s Tie
17
90. E-mail to Michael Ewald from 0000260 Relevance.
18 Jadwin, dated 10/9/03, telling Ewald (Exhibit
how to conduct the investigation into 560)
19 the “tiepulling” incident, who to talk
to, and what questions to ask.
20
91. Confidential file of investigation 0000031-70 Relevance. No foundation. No authentication.
21 of Jadwin pulling Dr. Lau by his tie, Hearsay. Misstates the evidence.
dated 10/21/03.
22
a) Portion of Jadwin’s interview 0000061-63 Relevance. No foundation. No authentication.
23 blaming Dr. Lau for the incident, Hearsay. Misstates the evidence.
alleging a prior history of Dr. Lau
24 being afraid of him because Jadwin
(allegedly) points out Dr. Lau’s many
25 mistakes.
26 b) During Jadwin’s interview, 0000063 Relevance. No foundation. No authentication.
27 conducted on 10/17/03, Jadwin Hearsay. Misstates the evidence.
accepts that he pulled the tie, says he
28 cannot really remember.

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 23
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 24 of 45

1 c) The investigator finds, by a 0000034 Relevance. No foundation. No authentication.


preponderance of the evidence, that Hearsay. Misstates the evidence, investigator
2 (Item #2) Jadwin violated the did NOT apply a “preponderance of evidence”
Workplace Violence Policy of the standard.
3 County of Kern and potentially
endangered the quality or efficiency of
4 patient care (because both Jadwin and
Lau testified that Lau told Jadwin that
5 he could not accompany him because
he had patient work to do).
6
92. Letter from Dr. Kolb to Jadwin, DFJ00246 Relevance.
7 dated 11/26/03, reprimanding him for
pulling Dr. Lau by his tie.
8
93. Letter to Dr. Lau from Jadwin, DFJ00590 Relevance.
9 dated 10119/05, apologizing for past
wrongs.
10
11 Dispute with Radiology
12 94. Dr. Ragland implied that Jadwin Ragland The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
was wrong in the dispute with the Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
13 radiology department because the 8/22/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
procedurist (the radiologist) should pgs. 155:2- is attached to the transcript
14 chose the equipment he uses (gauge of 156:13
needle is an example) because that is No foundation. Improper opinion. Improper
15 who is performing the task. conclusion.
16 95. Dr. Abraham, while discussing the Abraham The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
FNA Consulting Report, mentioned Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
17 that the radiologists were upset with 8/18/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
Jadwin because he was accusing them pgs. 59:6- is attached to the transcript.
18 of too many inadequate specimens 60:2
(“unsatisfactory for evaluation”) when No foundation. Improper speculation.
19 there were relatively few complaints Improper opinion. Improper conclusion.
of that before Jadwin arrived.
20
a) Jadwin’s actual (failing) test for 0000737 Relevance. No foundation. No authentication.
21 cervical pap smears. This test is Hearsay. Misstates the evidence.
conducted by the College of American
22 Pathologists (CAP). Of interest, on
Case #3 Jadwin marked
23 “unsatisfactory for evaluation” when
the accurate diagnosis was “squamous
24 cell carcinoma.”
25 96. Dr. Abraham talked about the lack Abraham The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
of trust between the other doctors and Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
26 Jadwin, which the FNA Consulting 8/18/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
Project report addresses as pgs. 62: 16- is attached to the transcript.
27 communication problems. 64:3
No foundation. Improper speculation.
28 Improper opinion. Improper conclusion.

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 24
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 25 of 45

1 97. Kern Medical Center FNA DFJ00251- None.


Consulting Project report by Dr. 270
2 David Lieu, M.D., M.B.A., dated
5/3/04.
3
a) Consultant’s core issue is the lack DFJ00255 Misstates evidence.
4 of communication and complete
distrust between radiology and
5 pathology with negative ramifications
for the clinicians and administration.
6
b) Consultant agreed with radiologists DFJ00257 Misstates evidence.
7 that long clinical history on the FNA
reports was unnecessary.
8
c) “ ... Dr. Jadwin and radiologists do DF100260 Relevance.
9 not communicate at this level. This
suggests that a breakdown in
10 communication is the fundamental
problem. This bridge was burned
11 down long ago.”
12 d) “Finally, both radiology and DFJ00269 Relevance.
pathology will work together to find
13 the best needle for deep FNAs.”
14 98. E-mail to Drs. Kercher and Kolb DFJ00289- Relevance.
from Jadwin, dated 9/3/04, stating 290
15 “You cannot dictate the size of the
needle by policy” and calling Dr. Lieu
16 “unjustifiably pompous,”
17 99. E-mail to Peter Bryan from DFJ00319- None.
Jadwin, dated 2/2/05, listing his 320
18 suggestions for improvement on the
FNA issue. Jadwin also states that the
19 radiology department was
“substantially at fault” for the conflict
20 between the departments. He
requested a formal apology from the
21 radiology department to himself and
the pathology department. He also
22 requested (in bold lettering) a public
announcement at the next Medical
23 Executive Committee (hereinafter
referred to as MEC) meeting that there
24 are no quality issues involving the
pathology department and Drs. Amin,
25 Abraham, Munoz and Naderi should
be standing at the podium during the
26 announcement.
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 25
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 26 of 45

1 100. Exchange of e-mails between Dr. DFJ00353- None.


Ragland and Jadwin, dated 2/25/05, in 354
2 which Jadwin complains about some
comments made by the radiologists at
3 the February QM meeting and
informing Dr. Ragland to be prepared
4 for Jadwin to request him to call for
supporting documentation from
5 radiology or announce that the
previous comments were unsupported.
6 Dr. Ragland shot back his displeasure
at the continuing conflict between
7 radiology and pathology, and stated
that his committee will not become a
8 battleground for this conflict.

9
Length of Presentations/October
10 2005 Oncology Conference
11 101. Exchange of e-mails between Dr. DFJ00241- Relevance.
Ragland and Jadwin, dated 11/19 & 242
12 11/20/03, about the last Quality
Management meeting. Dr. Ragland
13 contradicted Jadwin’s statement that
the pathology presentation during the
14 meeting was 20 minutes; Dr. Ragland
said it went on much longer than 20
15 minutes and proceeded to give Jadwin
advice on which information was most
16 important to present and how it could
be presented succinctly.
17
102. Memo from Dr. Ragland to None.
18 Jadwin, dated 1/21/04, that
presentations must be concise and that
19 the last Blood Usage Report-52 slides-
will not fit in the allotted time.
20
103. Memo from Dr. McBride to DFJ00381 None.
21 Jadwin, dated 5/9/05, requesting that
22 the time required for the pathology
presentation at the oncology
conference be kept to a minimum.
23
24 104. Instructions for the Cancer Patel Depo., None.
Conference presenters 1) the 12/6/07,
25 presentation is to contain less than 10 Exhibit 25
slides, 2) length not to exceed 20
26 minutes for comprehensive
background and overview of testing,
27 and 3) all physicians involved in the
case being presented must be notified
28 beforehand.

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 26
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 27 of 45

1 105. Pathology Dept.’s oncology DFJ00508- None.


conference presentation----67 slides- 574
2 by Jadwin, reviewing gynecology
cases and alleged errors in diagnosis
3 by University of Southern California
(hereinafter referred to as USC).
4
106. Memo from the Cancer DFJ00578 Relevance.
5 Committee (Drs. Patel, Johnson, and
McBride) to Jadwin, dated 10/12/05,
6 insisting that his presentation take no
more than 5 minutes per patient case.
7
107. Anonymous (redacted) memo DFJ00580 Improper speculation. Improper opinion.
8 (author-Dr. Taylor) of complaint about
Jadwin’s oncology presentation, dated
9 10/12/05. Some quotes: “ ...
inappropriate to bring
10 political/personal battles to an
educational forum filled with residents
11 and students,” and “ ... inappropriate
to ‘bash’ reputable institutions like
12 USC and Stanford,” and “ ...made
[Jadwin] look like a conceited,
13 pompous buffoon.”

14 108. Dr. Royce Johnson also voiced a Harris The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
complaint. Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
15 8/13/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
pgs. 126:8- is attached to the transcript.
16 127: 19
Hearsay. No foundation.
17 109. Oncology Conference Exhibit 190 None.
Performance Evaluations of 10/12/05
18 where criticisms of Jadwin’s
presentation are written in the
19 comments section on the following
Bates-stamped pages:
20 0000516,522,526,536, and 548.
21 110. Dr. Ragland was not present at Ragland The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
the October Oncology Conference so Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
22 his testimony was limited to the 8/22/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
comments he heard Jadwin make pgs. 106: is attached to the transcript.
23 regarding the conference (which is an 18-109:14
admission against interest). Dr. and 156:14- Misstates testimony. No foundation. Vague as
24 Ragland said that Jadwin’s excuse for 25 to time.
monopolizing the oncology
25 conference was that “the only
important information on that case
26 was his.”
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 27
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 28 of 45

1 111. Dr. Abraham testified that Jadwin Abraham The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
went on much longer than a normal Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
2 pathology presentation and she was 8/18/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
embarrassed for him and by some of pgs. 14: 10- is attached to the transcript.
3 the things that he said. Her overall 21: 17 and
feeling was one of discomfort. She 131:5- Misstates testimony. Improper opinion.
4 definitely felt that his criticisms of 133:23 and Improper conclusion. Improper speculation.
outside consultants were inappropriate 135:24-
5 and further evidence of his arrogance 138:22
because the issue was not one of who
6 was- right-and-who-was-wrong but of
the actual sample and how it could be
7 read. Jadwin’s position that it is a
patient care issue presumes that
8 Jadwin is right and Dr. Roy and the
outside pathologist are wrong.
9
112. Dr. Dutt believed that Jadwin Dutt Depo., The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
10 retaliated against Dr. Roy by verbally 8/20/08, certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
attacking him, angrily, at the October pgs.292:25- informal attorney use. No reporter certification
11 oncology conference. 293:20 is attached to the transcript.

12 Improper speculation. Improper opinion. No


foundation.
13 113. Letter from Drs. Kercher, DFJ00588 No foundation. Improper opinion. Improper
Ragland, Abraham and Harris to conclusion.
14 Jadwin, dated 10/17/05, about
Jadwin’s October oncology
15 presentation. The criticisms of the
presentation were 1) it exceeded the
16 time allotted to it, 2) Jadwin failed to
follow the leader of the conference on
17 brevity, and 3) Jadwin used a public
forum for a personal agenda and/or for
18 making a political statement.

19 114. E-mail from Dr. Ragland to Dr. 0000094 Improper speculation. Improper opinion.
Harris, dated 10118/05, describing
20 Jadwin’s attitude during the meeting
on 10/17/05. When handed the
21 evaluations of his presentation, he
would not look at them. The e-mail
22 states that Jadwin has a “lack of
communication skills” and fails to
23 “extend basic courtesy to his
colleagues.”
24
115. Jadwin’s evaluation of the DFJ00689 Misstates evidence.
25 11/9/05 oncology conference (what he
filled out). He complained that it ran
26 to 8:38 a.m. and he noted he would
discuss the overrun with Dr. McBride.
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 28
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 29 of 45

1 116. Memorandum to Supervisor 0001566- None.


Michael Rubio, District V, from Peter 1567
2 Bryan, dated 1/17/06, giving him
background on the problems arising
3 from the October oncology
conference. Bryan tells of a meeting
4 he had with Jadwin about a week after
the conference in which Jadwin was
5 extremely angry and making loud,
derogatory comments about various
6 members of the medical staff. He said
he became concerned about Jadwin’s
7 emotional health. He also said that
Jadwin has never been able to state a
8 resolution to the impasse. Bryan also
says that he will meet again with
9 Jadwin and inform him of some
expectations for future conduct, or he
10 will consider removing him as the
chairman of the pathology department.
11
12 PCCs
13 117. PCC issue was a difference in Bryan The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
professional judgment, the process by Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
14 the nursing staff was working for 8/14/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
them, and Jadwin failed to work pgs. 205:6- is attached to the transcript.
15 within the institution and committee 206: 25
structure. Also, Bryan inferred that (Exhibit Hearsay. Improper opinion. Improper
16 Jadwin had accused Toni Smith of 291) conclusion. Improper speculation.
ethical lapses which is an example of
17 “a pattern of inability to establish an
effective means of dialogue.”
18
118. E-mail to Toni Smith, R.N. from DFJ00408- None.
19 Jadwin, dated 5/20/05, inquiring after 409
audits of the nursing department of
20 which only one was received and
arguing that PCCs should be sent to
21 the blood bank when complete.
22 119. E-mail to Toni Smith from DFJ02499 None.
Jadwin, dated 5/20/05, recounting
23 Jadwin’s telephone conversation with
Holly Rapp, AABB Accreditation
24 Director.
25
26
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 29
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 30 of 45

1 120. Exchange of e-mails between 0000421- None.


Toni Smith and Jadwin, dated between 424
2 6/15/05 and 6/28/05, about the PCC
issues. In 0000423, Jadwin states that
3 a PCC must not be signed until the
time of the infusion, or KMC is not
4 meeting AABB accreditation
standards.
5
121. Typed notes, dated 1/10/06, of 0000572 No foundation. No authentication. Hearsay.
6 interviews with various people and Misstates the evidence.
institutions re: sending the Product
7 Chart Copies (PCCs) back to the
blood bank (pathology). The author
8 unknown- interviewed Michelle Burris
who said there is no reason to return
9 PCCs to pathology. The author
interviewed Ann Schadler, UCLA
10 Blood Bank Director, who said their
PCCs are in the patient’s record only,
11 not the blood bank. The author
interviewed Julia, UCSD Blood Bank,
12 who said there was no reason to return
the form to the blood bank. The author
13 also interviewed Dr. Wu and Jay,
supervisor of Mercy Lab and Blood
14 Bank, who said that the PCC goes in
the patient’s record and there is no
15 reason to return the PCC to the blood
bank.
16
122. E-mail to Peter Bryan from DFJ00784 None.
17 Jadwin, dated 4/10/06, about several
issues but he brings up non-
18 compliance with state regulations,
JCAHO, and AABB on the issues of
19 the PCCs.

20 123. Notes of meeting dated 4/14/06 DFJ00788 No foundation. No authentication. Hearsay.


with Peter Bryan, Karen Barnes and Misstates the evidence.
21 Jadwin on 4/13/06. There is no
problem with the PCCs because 5
22 charts were reviewed (and approved)
by JCAHO.
23
124. E-mail to Peter Bryan from DFJ00793 None.
24 Jadwin, dated 4/17/06, claiming that
the JCAHO review was too small of a
25 sample and KMC was in
noncompliance on their handling of
26 the PCCs and there was a need for
action.
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 30
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 31 of 45

1 a) Bryan criticizes Jadwin’s 57 memos Bryan The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
to Toni Smith, R.N. as a “way of Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
2 flooding the system and seeing what 8/14/08, pg. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
sticks and what doesn’t.” 226: 10-16 is attached to the transcript.
3
125. Memo to Peter Bryan from Toni 0000401- No foundation. Improper conclusion. Improper
4 Smith, dated 4/17/06, responding to 403 opinion. Improper speculation.
Jadwin’s e-mail to Peter Bryan of
5 4/17/06, disagreeing with Jadwin’s
characterization of the PCC situation
6 and stating that Jadwin’s proposals on
this issue were strategies that have
7 previously been rejected by KMC.

8 126. Harris had complaints about Harris The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
Jadwin’s handling of the PCC issue- Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
9 Jadwin was demanding, inflexible, 8/13/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
unreasonable in wanting the originals, pgs. 268:8- is attached to the transcript.
10 impatient. 23
No foundation. Improper opinion. Improper
11 speculation.
127. Toni Smith, R.N. explained that Smith The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
12 the reason that some PCCs looked like Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
they were not complete is that the 8/19/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
13 PCC form was actually in duplicate pgs. 59:4- is attached to the transcript.
and the nurses were not consistent 60: 13
14 about writing on only one copy and Improper speculation. No foundation.
throwing the blank copy away.
15
128. Toni Smith said that Jadwin was Smith The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
16 never interested or willing to listen to Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
her ideas. When asked what Jadwin’s 8/19/08, pg. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
17 physical demeanor was like in these 65:2-13 and is attached to the transcript.
conversations in which he was 74: 12-22
18 allegedly uncooperative, she said “He Improper speculation. Best evidence rule.
was obviously frustrated, obviously
19 not going to change his mind,
obviously not willing to listen to
20 anything. I presented cases from other
hospitals, some of the lab directors
21 that I hold in high esteem. [He] had no
interest in any of that.”
22
129. Jadwin’s idea to have the PCCs Smith The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
23 stored in his department may violate Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
California law, Title 22, by 8/19/08, pg. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
24 fragmenting the medical record. 71 :2-21 is attached to the transcript.
Jadwin’s idea was opposed by Toni
25 Smith, R.N., the medical records Improper speculation. Improper conclusion.
department, and the medical records Hearsay.
26 committee which ultimately
determines what the contents of a
27 medical record will be.
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 31
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 32 of 45

1 130. Toni Smith, R.N. offered a Smith The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
succinct description of her Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
2 conversations with Jadwin on the issue 8/19/08,pgs. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
of PCCs. The conversations were not 72:19-73:17 is attached to the transcript.
3 professional conversations-”It just was
a dead-end conversation. I mean, he Improper speculation. Improper conclusion.
4 had his mind made up that those Hearsay.
things-he had never seen an
5 organization where they hadn’t been
stored in the lab. I had indicated-I
6 indicated to him that I had never seen
an organization where they were
7 stored in the lab. And I questioned
him as to how he was going to be able
8 to locate that if we needed it for
patient care purposes. I think he said
9 he was going to store them in binders
or in notebooks or boxes or
10 something. You know, it was
irrelevant as far as I was concerned. I
11 felt that it was very important to have
that information-one, we needed to
12 know that the patient had-had received
the blood. We needed the vital sign
13 information during the blood
transfusion part, which would leave a
14 huge gaping hole in patient
information if that was stored
15 somewhere in the lab.”

16 131. Toni Smith considered Jadwin’s Smith The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
conduct at the MEC meeting as Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
17 uncooperative, refusal to consider 8119/08, pg. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
other points of view or suggestions, 77:9-20 is attached to the transcript.
18 etc.
Relevance.
19 132. Jadwin’s charges of being out of Smith The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
compliance with regulatory agencies Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
20 were unfounded, and regulatory 8/19108, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
agencies found no jeopardy of KMC’s pgs. 84: 11- is attached to the transcript.
21 level of compliance. 85:7
Misstates testimony. Speculation. No
22 foundation. Improper conclusion.

23 In General Treatment of Other


Staff
24
25
26
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 32
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 33 of 45

1 133. Dr. Abraham gradually had fewer Abraham The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
and fewer interactions with Jadwin Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
2 because his attitude was pompous and 8118/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
arrogant. Since the conversations with pgs. 49: 16- is attached to the transcript.
3 Jadwin were not cordial, it negatively 52:9 and 75
affected patient care. She didn’t :22-76: 19 No foundation. Improper speculation.
4 discuss Jadwin’s attitude with other Improper opinion. Improper conclusion.
doctors because she thought his
5 attitude was evident to everyone.

6 134. Dr. Abraham testified that many Abraham The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
or most physicians reported Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
7 difficulties in getting along with 8118/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
Jadwin. pgs. 185:7- is attached to the transcript.
8 187:9
No foundation. Improper speculation.
9 Improper opinion. Hearsay.
135. Jadwin’s communication style Bryan The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
10 was, to some people, offensive and Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
abrasive, and he had a hard time 8114/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
11 accepting differing opinions from pgs. 90:4- is attached to the transcript.
others. 92:2
12 No foundation. Improper speculation.
Improper opinion. Hearsay.
13 136. “Compromise” was not in Bryan The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
Jadwin’s vocabulary. It is not enough Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
14 to be right; a department chair must 8114/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
exercise judgment on how to deal with pgs. 100: is attached to the transcript.
15 others. 12102: 1
No foundation. Improper speculation.
16 Improper opinion.
137. Jadwin said Dr. Ragland was not Bryan The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
17 qualified to be a staff officer, and he Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
called Dr. Harris an idiot on several 8114/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
18 occasions. pgs. is attached to the transcript.
107:16109:
19 11 Relevance.
20 138. E-mail to Bryan from Jadwin Bryan The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
asking Bryan what he (Bryan) has Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
21 done on the cytotech issue. Bryan said 8114/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
that he was not the appropriate person pgs. 171: is attached to the transcript.
22 to resolve this. Jadwin should be 17173: 11
directing this to the chairman; Bryan (Exhibit No foundation. Improper conclusion.
23 only gets involved if approval is 271)
necessary.
24
139. Bryan recalls private Bryan The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
25 conversations with Jadwin where Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
Jadwin challenged Toni Smith’s 8114/08, pg. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
26 competency as chief nursing officer. 230: 10-15 is attached to the transcript.
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 33
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 34 of 45

1 140. Jadwin was so obsessed with Harris The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
personnel actions or inactions that he Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
2 was distracted in his duties. “ ... his 8113/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
behavior threatened a healthy, pgs. 171: is attached to the transcript.
3 productive work environment at the 16174: 8 pg.
hospital.” 173:9-10 No foundation. Improper speculation.
4 Improper opinion. Improper conclusion.
141. In most cases, doctors know how Harris The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
5 to calm each other down and act Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
professionally and collegially. Jadwin 8/13/08,pgs. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
6 was “unusual.” Jadwin was unable to 212:16218: is attached to the transcript.
interact collegially and professionally 11
7 to create a healthy, collaborative pg.215:18- No foundation. Improper speculation.
working environment. 21 Improper opinion. Improper conclusion.
8
142. Jadwin denied referring to Dr. Jadwin The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
9 Epstein as cavalier. Jadwin said that Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
on another matter, at another time, he 3/12/08,901 informal attorney use. No reporter certification
10 said that Dr. Epstein’s diagnoses were :12-903: 1 is attached to the transcript.
a little cavalier.
11
143. Dr. Ragland testified that Jadwin Ragland The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
12 acted inappropriately in several Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
instances. 8/22/08, pg. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
13 12:8-23 is attached to the transcript.
14 No foundation. Improper speculation.
Improper opinion. Improper conclusion.
15 a) The first incident was when Jadwin, pg.16:15- The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
in a meeting, said Dr. Ragland was 16. certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
16 incompetent and shouldn’t be the informal attorney use. No reporter certification
medical staff president. is attached to the transcript.
17
No foundation. Improper speculation.
18 Improper opinion. Improper conclusion.
b) The second incident was Jadwin pgs. 59:21- The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
19 taking over the blood usage committee 60: 17 and certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
and not letting any other physicians on 86:5-25 informal attorney use. No reporter certification
20 it. Jadwin sent Dr. Ragland an e-mail is attached to the transcript.
stating that he thought having other
21 physicians on the committee was a Evidence was spoliated in violation of
waste of time because “they will all preservation request.
22 rubber stamp it.” Dr. Ragland
interpreted this to mean that Jadwin No foundation. Improper speculation.
23 did not think that anyone else at KMC Improper opinion. Improper conclusion.
had the competence or experience to
24 sit on the committee.
25
26
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 34
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 35 of 45

1 c) The third incident was Jadwin’s pg. 94:16 The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
fighting with the radiologists and 95:15 and certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
2 calling them incompetent. According 155:2- informal attorney use. No reporter certification
to Dr. Ragland, Jadwin was wrong 156:13 is attached to the transcript.
3 because the procedurist (the
radiologist) should chose the Hearsay. No foundation. Improper speculation.
4 equipment he uses (gauge of needle is Improper opinion. Improper conclusion.
an example) as that is who is
5 performing the task.

6 d) The fourth incident was Jadwin pgs. 106: The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
hijacking the presentation at the 18-109: 14 certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
7 October 2005 oncology conference. and 156:14- informal attorney use. No reporter certification
25 is attached to the transcript.
8
Hearsay. No foundation. Improper speculation.
9 Improper opinion. Improper conclusion.
144. Dr. Ragland observed an incident Ragland The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
10 involving Dr. Shertukde wherein Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
Jadwin intimidated her into giving the 8/22/08, pg. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
11 answer he wanted and then he 110:7-17 is attached to the transcript.
dismissed her from the room.
12
145. Watson describes how Jadwin’s Watson The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
13 disruptive misconduct was discussed Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
at several JCC meetings. 8/25/08, pg. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
14 13:3-16 is attached to the transcript.
15 Hearsay. No foundation. Improper speculation.
Improper conclusion.
16 146. Watson testified to his Watson The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
impression of Jadwin’s involvement Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
17 with KMC management regarding 8/25/08, pg. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
whether to remove him as chair, etc. 32:6-1 0 is attached to the transcript.
18 He felt that Peter Bryan had made a
lot of effort to engage Jadwin but that Hearsay. No foundation. Improper speculation.
19 Jadwin was unresponsive. Improper conclusion.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 35
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 36 of 45

1 147. Letter to Dr. Ko1b from Jadwin, DFJ00243- Relevance.


dated 11/22/03, complaining about the 245
2 situation at KMC. Jadwin asserted the
following: 1) offense at Dr. Kolb’s
3 counseling of Jadwin that his
leadership style needs to be kinder and
4 gentler; 2) distress at the criticisms he
received from Drs. Ragland and
5 Abraham at a Wednesday meeting; 3)
blame for the schism between
6 pathology and radiology over FNA
was on the radiologists; 4) personally
7 unaware of any inappropriate
interpersonal relations involving
8 himself; 5) hoped to be recognized by
others at KMC as one of the best
9 physicians and directors there; and 6)
any complaints about him were
10 “irresponsible attempts by a few
inadequate individuals.”
11
148. E-mail to Dr. Kercher from DFJ00316 None.
12 Jadwin, dated 2/1/05, requesting Dr.
Abraham be removed from the FNA
13 Committee because she wasn’t (by
implication) honest, objective or
14 impartial.

15 149. E-mail from Dr. Kercher to DFJ00317 Relevance.


Jadwin, dated 2/1/05, telling Jadwin
16 that he was not acting like a team
member.
17
150. E-mail to Peter Bryan from DFJ00319- None.
18 Jadwin, dated 2/2/05, listing his 320
suggestions for improvement on the
19 FNA issue. Jadwin also states that the
radiology department was
20 “substantially at fault” for the conflict
between the departments. He
21 requested a formal apology from the
radiology department to himself and
22 the pathology department. He also
requested (in bold lettering) a public
23 announcement at the next MEC
meeting that there are no quality
24 issues involving the pathology
department and Drs. Amin, Abraham,
25 Munoz and Naderi should be forced to
stand at the podium during the
26 announcement.
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 36
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 37 of 45

1 151. Exchange of e-mails between Dr. DFJ00353- None.


Ragland and Jadwin, dated 2/25/05, in 354
2 which Jadwin complains about some
comments made by the radiologists at
3 the February QM meeting and
informing Dr. Ragland to be prepared
4 for Jadwin to request him to call for
supporting documentation from
5 radiology or announce that the
previous comments were unsupported.
6 Dr. Ragland shot back his displeasure
at the continuing conflict between
7 radiology and pathology, and stated
that his committee will not become a
8 battleground for this conflict.

9 152. E-mail to Peter Bryan and Dr. DFJ00355 None.


Kercher from Jadwin, dated 2/28/05,
10 forwarding Dr. Ragland’s e-mail of
2/25/05 and asserting that because of
11 spelling, grammar, and syntax errors
in it that Dr. Ragland may be an
12 “impaired physician” with a “level of
intellectual functioning well below the
13 high school graduate level” and
thought processes that are “chaotic
14 and almost incoherent.” Jadwin
alleges that Dr. Ragland may have a
15 substance abuse, emotional and/or
cognitive function disorder, and
16 suggests monitored drug testing and
that Dr. Ragland’s patient care duties
17 be monitored as well.

18 a) Dr. Ragland heard about the e-mail Ragland The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
although he never saw it. He heard Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
19 that the e-mail was turned over to Dr. 8/22/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
Yoo, head of psychiatry. He also pgs. 332:4- is attached to the transcript.
20 heard that Jadwin had contacted the 337:2
licensing board about him with this Hearsay.
21 same accusation.

22 b) Letter to Dr. Ragland from Jadwin, [Compare to Relevance.


dated 10/19105, apologizing for past DFJ00355
23 wrongs, although he asserts that he above]
does not know how Dr. Ragland came DFJ00592
24 to dislike him. The irony is that
Jadwin’s letter contains many spelling
25 and grammatical mistakes and a
Freudian slip” ... and I have never
26 treated you and your patients
exceptionally well ...”
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 37
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 38 of 45

1 153. Letter to Dr. Sergio Perticucci DFJ00356~ Relevance.


from Jadwin, dated 3/3/05, 357
2 complaining about Dr. Perticucci’ s
complaints about the pathology
3 department. In particular, Jadwin
attempted to assert that an original
4 diagnosis of “atypical metaplasia” was
merely a transcription error because
5 the diagnosis should have been
“atypical hyperplasia.” Jadwin also
6 called the diagnosis rendered on the
same case by Dr. Felix of use
7 “nebulous.” Jadwin called Dr.
Perticucci dishonest and demanded an
8 apology.

9 154. E-mail to Dr. Kercher from DFJ00427 None.


Jadwin, dated 6/7/05, complaining
10 about Dr. Abraham’s conduct at an
MEC meeting and accusing her of an
11 “inappropriate personality defect.”

12 155. E-mail to Dr. Kercher from DFJ00436 None.


Jadwin, dated 6/27/05, demanding that
13 Dr. Abraham publicly apologize to
Jadwin at the next MEC meeting.
14
156. Letter to Dr. Roy from Jadwin, DFJ00738 Relevance.
15 dated 2/10/06, demanding apology
“meeting my specifications” if alleged
16 (pathology department) deficiencies
are not received in 14 days.
17
157. Memorandum from Peter Bryan DFJ00740- The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
18 to Jadwin, dated 2/21/06, chastising 741; Bryan certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
Jadwin for the tone of voice he used in Depo., informal attorney use. No reporter certification
19 his letter to Dr. Roy of 2/1 0/06 and 8/14/08, is attached to the transcript.
stating that “this method... exemplifies pgs. 137:1-
20 why it is becoming increasingly 144:9
difficult for you to work with key
21 members of the medical staff.”
22 158. Email to Peter Bryan from DFJ00744- None.
Jadwin, dated 2/23/06, following the 745
23 meeting of 2/22/06 urging Bryan to
take the moral high ground and called
24 Drs. Ragland and Abraham
“disgruntled, vindictive individuals.”
25
26
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 38
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 39 of 45

1 159. Exchange of e-mails with Peter DFJ00783 None.


Bryan from Jadwin, dated 3/24/06,
2 3/27/06, 4/5/06, criticizing Karen
Barnes for insisting on vicarious
3 liability of staffing agency before
placing a temporary pathologist. Also,
4 Jadwin postponed his own surgery
indefinitely because his mother was
5 ill.

6 160. Memo from Peter Bryan to DFJ00794- The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
Jadwin, dated 4/17/06, telling him that 795; Bryan certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
7 he must either work on improving his Depo., informal attorney use. No reporter certification
relationships with staff or step down 8/14/08, is attached to the transcript.
8 as chairman of pathology department. pgs. 231 :9-
Bryan states “You have made many 237:25; pgs. Misstates testimony.
9 derogatory comments about some of 233:2-17
the staff members” and “this apparent and 237:2-
10 lack of insight on your part is at the 11
heart of your inability to meaningfully
11 contribute as a member of the medical
staff leadership group.” In Bryan’s
12 Depo., he distinguished between the
department running well on a
13 technical level (which he notes in this
memo) and Jadwin’s deficiencies as
14 department chair

15 161. E-mail from Peter Bryan to 0001581 Relevance.


Jadwin, dated 4/17/06, responding to
16 an e-mail from Jadwin in which
Jadwin pushes an issue of “pathology
17 informatics.” Bryan’s response was
stem, “I clearly indicated to you that
18 your proposed solution of a free
standing system for pathology was not
19 going to happen. I have repeated this
to you many times ... “
20
162. Jadwin wanted to delete the Martinez The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
21 “Complete Blood Count” from the Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
laboratory’s test menu and only offer 4/16/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
22 the “Complete Blood Count with pgs. is attached to the transcript.
Differential.” Gilbert Martinez 121:17122:
23 believed Jadwin’s idea would pose a 19
compliance issue so Martinez took the
24 matter to the Compliance Committee.
Both options stayed on the test menu.
25 Martinez felt that Jadwin was being
uncooperative in this incident.
26
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 39
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 40 of 45

1 163. Gilbert Martinez described an Martinez The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
incident an unannounced inspection Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
2 occurred and Jadwin was not present. 4/16/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
Martinez proceeded to show the pgs. is attached to the transcript.
3 inspectors around the laboratory. 127:22130:
Jadwin returned, became upset when 3 Misstates testimony.
4 he discovered the inspectors were
there, stated that the inspection had
5 been mishandled, and then said that if
Jadwin had a gun, he would shoot
6 someone. Jadwin never apologized to
him for making the remark. The
7 incident happened sometime before
2005.
8
164. Dr. Dutt believed that Jadwin Dutt Depo., The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
9 tried to retaliate against Dr. Taylor 8/20/08 pgs. certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
who is married to Dr. Abraham. 291 :7-292: informal attorney use. No reporter certification
10 Jadwin’s dislike of Dr. Abraham is 11 is attached to the transcript.
well-known. For instance, Jadwin
11 refused to make the obvious diagnosis Improper speculation. Improper opinion.
on one of Dr. Taylor’s cases. Improper conclusion.
12
165. Dr. Dutt reported to Dr. Harris Dutt Depo., The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
13 complaints by Dr. Shertukde that 8/20/08, certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
Jadwin was angry and hostile toward pgs. 298:23- informal attorney use. No reporter certification
14 her. Dutt did so because he was afraid 300:24 is attached to the transcript.
that Dr. Shertukde or Vangie Gallegos
15 would file a case against the County Hearsay. Improper speculation.
for harassment or hostile work
16 environment based on Jadwin’s
behavior.
17
18 Meeting on February 22, 2006
19 166. Dr. Abraham recalled how Abraham The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
Jadwin insulted her and how he had Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
20 insulted Dr. Ragland and, in general, 8118/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
that he managed to insult everyone pgs. 198:24- is attached to the transcript.
21 who was there but she did not 207: 17
remember specific statements beyond
22 those directed at her and Dr. Ragland.
23 167. Jadwin insulted, literally, Bryan The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
everyone at the meeting face-to-face. Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
24 8/14/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
pgs. 109: is attached to the transcript.
25 12111: 10
Improper conclusion.
26
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 40
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 41 of 45

1 168. Bryan thanked Dr. Ragland for Bryan The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
showing restraint in the face of Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
2 Jadwin’s insults. 8/14/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
pgs. is attached to the transcript.
3 156:22157:
12 Improper conclusion.
4
169. Jadwin made attacking Harris The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
5 statements and charges at attendees of Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
2/22/06 meeting. 8/13/08, pg. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
6 159 :2-13 is attached to the transcript.

7 170. Jadwin insulted Dr. Ragland Harris The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
severely at the 2/22/06 meeting. Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
8 8113/08, pg. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
196:7-20 is attached to the transcript.
9
Improper conclusion.
10 171. Jadwin insulted all of the doctors Harris The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
at the meeting, including Dr. Harris. Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
11 8/13/08 pgs. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
230:4232: is attached to the transcript.
12 13
Improper conclusion.
13 172. Harris refused to characterize Harris The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
Jadwin’s behavior as crazy but he did Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
14 offer “excessive” as a description and 8113/08, informal attorney use. No reporter certification
agreed with Eugene Lee’s adjectives pgs. is attached to the transcript.
15 of “unprofessional” and 234:24235:
“unreasonable.” Harris said it was the 23 and
16 most unprofessional, unreasonable, 305:20308:
excessive behavior he has ever seen in 22
17 a physician.
18 173. The first incident of Jadwin’s Ragland The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
inappropriate conduct was when Depo., certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
19 Jadwin, during this meeting, said Dr. 8/22/08, pg. informal attorney use. No reporter certification
Ragland was incompetent and 16: 12-16 is attached to the transcript.
20 shouldn’t be the medical staff
president.
21
174. E-mail from Dr. Ragland to Peter 0000507 None.
22 Bryan, dated 2/23/06, stating that the
meeting with Jadwin on 2/22/06 was
23 “one of the most distasteful events I
have ever participated in.”
24
25 Demotion to Staff Pathologist
26
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 41
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 42 of 45

1 175. Pathology Dept. Proctoring 0000903 - No foundation. Not authenticated. Improper


Report on Dr. Dutt, dated 1/l8/06, and 913 conclusion. Improper opinion.
2 completed by Jadwin who said that
Dr. Dutt’s performance is “responsible
3 and excellent.”

4 176. Exchange of e-mails between Dr. DFJ01430 Hearsay. Speculation.


Dutt and Jadwin, dated 11/6/06,
5 regarding a container of specimen left
sitting out. To remedy the situation,
6 Dr. Dutt instructed that only
Evangeline “Vangie” Gallegos was to
7 process the placentas.

8 177. E-mail from Evangeline 0000824 Hearsay. Improper conclusion. Improper


“Vangie” Gallegos to Dr. Dutt, dated speculation. Improper opinion.
9 11/6/06, thanking him for his support
and complaining about Jadwin
10 interfering in her work area and
“creating more work for everybody.”
11 She asked if she could go home early
as she was feeling sick.
12
178. Exchange of e-mails between Dr. DFJ01439 Hearsay..
13 Dutt and Jadwin, dated 11/13/06 and (000084084
11/14/06, wherein Jadwin requested 1)
14 that he have an assigned assistant and
that the assigned assistant be required
15 to notify him when leaving the lab for
more than 5 minutes. Dr. Dutt’s
16 response was to deny the need for an
assistant as the department had three
17 pathologists and to remark how
“demeaning and time consuming” it
18 would be to constantly clock in and
out.
19
179. E-mail from Dr. Dutt to Jadwin, DFJ01446- Hearsay. No foundation. Improper conclusion.
20 dated 11/17/06, expressing frustration 01447 Improper speculation. Improper opinion.
with Jadwin’s reaction to counseling (0000843)
21 which is to escalate the situation,
blame others, or attack others. Dr.
22 Dutt also promised to find the records
where Jadwin did not submit a “rush”
23 case or most of his other cases that
day. He also asserted that Jadwin had
24 done this before.
25 180. E-mail from Dr. Dutt to Jadwin, DFJ01448 Hearsay. No foundation. Improper conclusion.
dated 11/22/06, discussing their (0000850) Improper speculation. Improper opinion.
26 disagreement on the necessity for
privileges for FNA and the necessity
27 for proctoring.
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 42
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 43 of 45

1 181. E-mail from Dr. Dutt to Jadwin, DFJ01449 Hearsay. No foundation. Improper conclusion.
dated 11/22/06, reminding him of a (000085]) Improper speculation. Improper opinion.
2 rush case that Jadwin failed to process
promptly and counseling Jadwin to
3 remember it when criticizing others.

4 182. E-mail from Dr. Dutt to Jadwin, 0000827 Hearsay. No foundation. Improper conclusion.
dated 12/4/06, chastising Jadwin for Improper speculation. Improper opinion.
5 criticizing Dr. Shertukde’s diagnosis
without consulting others first;
6 chastising him for refusing to get
outside consult on a hard case; and
7 chastising him for failing to remove
the sharps from the cutting area when
8 he was done.

9 a) Minutes of the meeting of the 0000899 No foundation. Improper conclusion. Improper


pathology/histology department on speculation. Improper opinion.
10 10/17/06. It was noted that Dr.
Shertukde was concerned that blades
11 were not being removed once grossing
was done. She and Dr. Dutt remove
12 and discard the blades immediately.

13 b) E-mail from Dr. Dutt to Yolanda 0000862 Hearsay. No foundation. Improper conclusion.
Figueroa, dated 12/7/06, Improper speculation. Improper opinion.
14 acknowledging her report that Jadwin
had left two long blades and a scalpel
15 out after he was finished. 183. E-mail
from Dr. Dutt to Jadwin, dated
16 12/5/06, regarding Jadwin’s
uncooperativeness with him and
17 general failure to adhere to a chain of
command.
18
183. E-mail from Dr. Dutt to Jadwin, DFJ01465 Hearsay. No foundation. Improper conclusion.
19 dated 12/5/06, regarding Jadwin’s (0000856) Improper speculation. Improper opinion.
uncooperativeness with him and
20 general failure to adhere to a chain of
command.
21
184. E-mails between Dr. Dutt and DFJ01476- Hearsay. No foundation. Improper conclusion.
22 Jadwin, dated 12/6/06, arguing over a 1478 Improper speculation. Improper opinion.
criticism Jadwin made of a diagnosis (0000857-
23 that Dr. Shertukde did and involving 858)
alleged defamatory and retaliatory
24 statements made by Jadwin. Dr. Dutt
tells Jadwin that people are afraid of
25 him because of his hostility and that it
is Jadwin’s fault for how he treats
26 others.
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 43
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 44 of 45

1 185. E-mail from Dr. Dutt to David 0001466 Hearsay. No foundation. Improper conclusion.
Culberson, dated 12/6/06, stating that Improper speculation. Improper opinion.
2 he had counseled Jadwin for not
sending out a case for consultation
3 that, in fact, turned out to be a missed
endometrial cancer and now Jadwin
4 was pushing a lot of cases out for
consultation, burdening the staffs time
5 and budget.

6 186. E-mail from Dr. Dutt to Jadwin, 0000863 Hearsay. No foundation. Improper conclusion.
dated 12/7/06, chastising him for Improper speculation. Improper opinion.
7 commanding Yolanda to treat the
placentas when in his e-mail of
8 11/6/06 (0000825 above) specifically
said that only Vangie was to work
9 with placentas.

10 187. Jadwin was uncooperative after Dutt Depo., The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
returning from leave. He was asked 8/20/08, pg. certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
11 specifically to resume doing the blood 284:25- informal attorney use. No reporter certification
bank reviews and he did not do them. 285:5 is attached to the transcript.
12
No foundation. Improper conclusion. Improper
13 speculation. Improper opinion.
188. Dr. Dutt, acting Chair of the Dutt Depo., The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
14 Pathology Department had concerns 8/20/08, certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
that Jadwin was creating a hostile pgs. 286:6- informal attorney use. No reporter certification
15 work environment. This prompted 289: 1; 290: is attached to the transcript.
meetings with Dr. Perez, David 14-20
16 Culberson, and Dr. Harris. No foundation. Improper conclusion. Improper
speculation. Improper opinion.
17 189. Dr. Dutt would try to counsel Dutt Depo., The transcript is not authenticated. It is not a
Jadwin one-on-one but Jadwin would 8/20/08, certified copy, it is a condensed transcript for
18 avoid the conversation. He would pgs.296:20- informal attorney use. No reporter certification
make an excuse to leave the room or 297:13 is attached to the transcript.
19 leave the hospital. Because Jadwin
made it difficult for Dr. Dutt to talk to No foundation. Improper conclusion. Improper
20 him, Dr. Dutt had no alternative but to speculation. Improper opinion.
send his concerns about Jadwin’s
21 work to the Peer Review Committee.
22 190. E-mail to Dr. Dutt from Jadwin, DFJ01479- None.
dated 12/6/06, with copies to David 1480
23 Culberson, Dr. Harris and Karen
Barnes, alleging that he has been
24 “singled out for non-transparent ‘PCC
r review’“ as well as personal attacks,
25 and he requests the KMC
administration to initiate a formal
26 review.
27
Date: December 1, 2008
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 44
Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG Document 283 Filed 12/01/2008 Page 45 of 45

1 /s/ Eugene D. Lee


LAW OFFICE OF EUGENE LEE
2 555 West Fifth Street, Suite 3100
Los Angeles, CA 90013
3 Phone: (213) 992-3299
Fax: (213) 596-0487
4 email: elee@LOEL.com
Attorney for Plaintiff DAVID F. JADWIN, D.O.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

USDC, ED Case No. 1:07-cv-00026 OWW TAG


Π’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF ∆’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT 45

You might also like