THOMAS M. PARKER, Magistrate Judge.
Defendant, Lake Hospital System, Inc., ("Lake Health") hereby submits its Answer, Affirmative Defenses, and Counterclaim in response to the Second Amended Complaint of Plaintiff Stacey Wellington, and denies each and every statement, allegation, and averment contained in the Second Amended Complaint except and to the extent specifically admitted or qualified below.
1. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 1 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
2. Lake Health admits the allegations in Paragraph 2 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
3. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 3 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health states that its principal place of business is in Concord, Lake County, Ohio. Lake Health admits all remaining allegations in Paragraph 3 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
4. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 4 of Plaintiff's Complaint, Lake Health admits Defendant Brooks' residence and further admits that Phillip Brooks was an independent contractor at Lake Health from June 20, 2016 until January 21, 2017. Mr. Brooks was then employed by Lake Health from January 22, 2017 through November 1, 2018. Lake Health denies all remaining allegations in Paragraph 4 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
5. Lake Health admits this Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiff's claims as-pleaded, but specifically denies that Plaintiff has exhausted administrative remedies necessary to perfect her federal claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended.
6. Lake Health admits that this Court has personal jurisdiction.
7. Lake Health admits that venue is proper in this judicial district.
8. Lake Health is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 8 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
9. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 9 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
10. Lake Health admits the allegations in Paragraph 10 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
11. Lake Health admits the allegations in Paragraph 11 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
12. Lake Health admits the allegations in Paragraph 12 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
13. In response to Paragraph 13 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health states that the referenced policy speaks for itself. Lake Health denies Plaintiff's characterization of the contents, purpose, authority, or intent of the referenced policy. Lake Health denies any and all remaining allegations in Paragraph 13 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
14. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 14 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
15. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 15 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
16. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 16 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
17. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 17 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
18. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 18 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
19. Lake Health is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 19 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
20. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 20 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
21. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 21 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
22. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 22 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
23. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 23 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
24. Lake Health is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 24 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
25. Lake Health is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 25 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
26. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 26 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
27. In response to Paragraph 27 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health admits that Phillip Brooks sent an email to Plaintiff Stacey Wellington on September 27, 2018, at approximately 3:37 p.m. that stated, "Your show, your shop." Lake Health denies Plaintiff's characterization of the contents, purpose, authority, or intent of the referenced September 27, 2018, email. Lake Health denies any and all remaining allegations in Paragraph 27 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
28. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 28 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
29. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 29 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health states that the referenced policy speaks for itself. Lake Health denies Plaintiff's characterization of the contents, purpose, authority, or intent of the referenced policy. Lake Health denies any and all remaining allegations in Paragraph 29 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
30. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 30 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health states that the referenced policy speaks for itself. Lake Health denies Plaintiff's characterization of the contents, purpose, authority, or intent of the referenced policy. Lake Health denies any and all remaining allegations in Paragraph 30 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
31. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 31 of Plaintiff's Complaint, Lake Health admits that Plaintiff contacted Kimberly Lehotsky on September 27, 2018. Lake Health specifically denies that Plaintiff complained to Kimberly Lehotsky about any alleged sexual harassment by Phillip Brooks and denies all remaining allegations in Paragraph 31 of Plaintiff's Compliant.
32. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 32 of Plaintiff's Complaint. Further answering, Lake Health states that Plaintiff has thus far failed to produce the "resignation letter" referenced in Paragraph 32 of her Second Amended Complaint.
33. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 33 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
34. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 34 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health states that the referenced email communication speaks for itself. Lake Health denies Plaintiff's characterization of the contents, purpose, authority, or intent of the referenced email communication. Lake Health denies any and all remaining allegations in Paragraph 34 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
35. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 35 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
36. Lake Health is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 36 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
37. Lake Health is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 37 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
38. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 38 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
39. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 39 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health admits only that Plaintiff emailed Phillip Brooks on October 5, 2018 at approximately 9:39 a.m. and stated, in part, "The only time I got upset and called HR was when I felt like my husband's medical information was handled inappropriately," thereby admitting that she had never complained to Lake Health administration about alleged "sexual harassment" by Phillip Brooks. Lake Health denies all remaining allegations in Paragraph 39 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
40. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 40 of Plaintiff's Complaint, Lake Health states that the referenced text messages speak for themselves. Lake Health denies Plaintiff's characterization of the contents, purpose, authority, or intent of the referenced text messages. Lake Health denies all remaining allegations in Paragraph 40 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
41. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 41 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
42. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 42 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
43. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 43 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
44. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 44 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
45. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 45 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
46. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 46 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health admits only that Phillip Brooks resigned effective November 1, 2018. Lake Health denies all remaining allegations in Paragraph 46 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
47. Lake Health is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 47 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
48. Lake Health is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 48 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
49. Lake Health is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 49 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
50. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 50 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health admits that Dr. Mihaela Donca has privileges at Lake Health. Lake Health is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations in Paragraph 50 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
51. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 51 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health states that the referenced paperwork speaks for itself. Lake Health denies Plaintiff's characterization of the contents, purpose, authority, or intent of the referenced paperwork. Lake Health denies all remining allegations in Paragraph 51 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
52. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 52 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health admits only that on or about October 25, 2018, Stacey Wellington was granted permission to observe Dr. Mihaela Donca from November 1, 2018, through April 30, 2019. Further answering, Lake Health states that this permission was rescinded via written correspondence to Plaintiff's counsel, Dennis Fogarty, Esq. on November 30, 2018, as a result of Plaintiff's threatening communications with Lake Health employees. Lake Health denies all remaining allegations in Paragraph 52 of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint.
53. Lake Health is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 53 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
54. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 54 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health admits only that Stacey Wellington engaged in email correspondence with Carissa Smith on or about December 21, 2018. Lake Health denies Plaintiff's characterization of the contents, purpose, authority, or intent of that correspondence. Lake Health denies all remaining allegations in Paragraph 54 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
55. Lake Health is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 55 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
56. Lake Health is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 56 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
57. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 57 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health admits only that Stacey Wellington engaged in email correspondence with Michelle Pohl on or about December 27, 2018. Lake Health denies Plaintiff's characterization of the contents, purpose, authority, or intent of that correspondence. Lake Health denies all remaining allegations in Paragraph 57 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
58. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 58 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health admits only that Stacey Wellington engaged in email correspondence with Michelle Pohl on or about December 28, 2018. Lake Health denies Plaintiff's characterization of the contents, purpose, authority, or intent of that correspondence. Lake Health denies all remaining allegations in Paragraph 58 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
59. In response to Paragraph 59 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health admits only that Stacey Wellington forwarded a "Medical/PAC Student or Residency/Fellow Rotation Request Form" to Michelle Pohl on January 3, 2019. Lake Health denies Plaintiff's characterization of the contents, purpose, authority, or intent of that form. Lake Health denies all remaining allegations in Paragraph 59 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
60. Lake Health is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 60 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
61. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 61 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health admits only that Stacey Wellington sent an email to Michelle Pohl on January 9, 2019. Lake Health denies Plaintiff's characterization of the contents, purpose, authority, or intent of that email. Lake Health denies all remaining allegations in Paragraph 61 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
62. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 62 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health admits only that Michelle Pohl sent an email to Stacey Wellington on January 10, 2019. Lake Health denies Plaintiff's characterization of the contents, purpose, authority, or intent of that email. Lake Health denies all remaining allegations in Paragraph 62 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
63. Lake Health is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 63 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
64. Lake Health admits the allegations in Paragraph 64 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
65. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 65 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health admits only that Plaintiff engaged in email correspondence with Michelle Pohl on February 22, 2019. Lake Health denies Plaintiff's characterization of the contents, purpose, authority, or intent of this correspondence. Lake Health denies all remaining allegations in Paragraph 65 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
66. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 66 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health admits only that Stacey Wellington sent an email to Michelle Pohl on February 27, 2019. Lake Health denies Plaintiff's characterization of the contents, purpose, authority, or intent of that email. Lake Health denies all remaining allegations in Paragraph 66 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
67. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 67 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health admits only that Plaintiff's counsel sent a letter to counsel for Lake Health on February 28, 2019. Lake Health denies Plaintiff's characterization of the contents, purpose, authority, or intent of that letter. Lake Health denies all remaining allegations in Paragraph 67 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
68. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 68 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health admits only that Lake Health sent an email to Stacey Wellington on March 4, 2019. Lake Health denies Plaintiff's characterization of the contents, purpose, authority, or intent of that email. Lake Health denies all remaining allegations in Paragraph 68 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
69. Lake Health is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 69 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
70. Lake Health is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 70 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
71. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 71 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health admits only that Sally Hassar sent an email to Stacey Wellington and others on March 5, 2019, that stated, "Please note that Stacey Wellington
72. Lake Health is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 72 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
73. Lake Health is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 73 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
74. Lake Health is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 74 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
75. Lake Health incorporates its responses to Paragraphs 1 through 74 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint as if fully stated herein.
76. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 76 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
77. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 77 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
78. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 78 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
79. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 79 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
80. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 80 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
81. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 81 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
82. Lake Health incorporates its responses to Paragraphs 1 through 81 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint as if fully stated herein.
83. Paragraph 83 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint states a legal conclusion to which no admission or denial is required. To the extent any response is required, Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 83 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
84. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 84 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
85. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 85 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
86. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 86 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
87. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 87 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
88. Lake Health incorporates its responses to Paragraphs 1 through 87 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint as if fully stated herein.
89. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 89 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
90. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 90 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
91. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 91 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
92. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 92 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
93. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 93 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
94. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 94 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
95. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 95 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
96. Lake Health incorporates its responses to Paragraphs 1 through 95 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint as if fully stated herein.
97. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 97 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
98. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 98 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
99. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 99 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
100. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 100 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
101. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 101 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
102. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 102 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
103. Lake Health incorporates its responses to Paragraphs 1 through 102 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint as if fully stated herein.
104. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 104 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
105. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 105 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
106. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 106 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
107. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 107 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
108. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 108 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
109. Lake Health incorporates its responses to Paragraphs 1 through 108 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint as if full stated herein.
110. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 110 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health admits that Phillip Brooks was an independent contractor at Lake Health from June 20, 2016 until January 21, 2017. Mr. Brooks was then employed by Lake Health from January 22, 2017 through November 1, 2018. Lake Health denies all remaining allegations in Paragraph 110 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
111. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 111 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health states that the referenced memorandum speaks for itself. Lake Health denies Plaintiff's characterization of the contents, purpose, authority, or intent of the referenced memorandum. Lake Health denies all remaining allegations in Paragraph 111 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
112. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 112 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
113. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 113 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health states that the referenced EEOC complaints speak for themselves. Lake Health denies Plaintiff's characterization of the contents, purpose, authority, or intent of the referenced EEOC complaints. Lake Health denies all remaining allegations in Paragraph 113 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
114. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 114 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
115. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 115 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
116. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 116 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
117. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 117 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
118. Lake Health incorporates its responses to Paragraphs 1 through 117 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint as if fully stated herein.
119. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 119 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
120. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 120 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
121. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 121 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
122. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 122 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
123. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 123 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
124. Lake Health incorporates its responses to Paragraphs 1 through 123 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint as if fully stated herein.
125. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 125 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
126. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 126 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
127. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 127 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
128. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 128 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
129. Lake Health incorporates its responses to Paragraphs 1 through 128 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint as if fully stated herein.
130. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 130 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
131. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 131 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
132. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 132 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
133. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 133 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
134. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 134 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
135. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 135 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
136. Lake Health incorporates its responses to Paragraphs 1 through 135 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint as if fully stated herein.
137. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 137 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
138. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 138 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
139. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 139 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
140. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 140 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
141. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 141 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
142. Lake Health incorporates its responses to Paragraphs 1 through 141 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint as if fully stated herein.
143. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 143 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
144. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 144 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
145. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 145 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
146. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 146 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
147. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 147 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
148. Lake Health incorporates its responses to Paragraphs 1 through 147 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint as if fully stated herein.
149. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 149 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
150. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 150 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
151. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 151 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
152. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 152 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
153. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 153 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
154. Lake Health incorporates its responses to Paragraphs 1 through 153 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint as if fully stated herein.
155. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 155 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
156. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 156 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
157. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 157 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
158. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 158 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
159. Lake Health incorporates its responses to Paragraphs 1 through 158 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint as if fully stated herein.
160. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 160 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
161. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 161 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
162. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 162 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
163. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 163 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
164. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 164 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
165. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 165 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
166. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 166 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
167. Lake Health incorporates its responses to Paragraphs 1 through 166 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint as if fully stated herein.
168. In response to Paragraph 168 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health states that the allegations in Paragraph 168 relate to a claim against a party other than Lake Health, and that no response to these allegations on behalf of Lake Health is required. To the extent any response on behalf of Lake Health is required, Lake Health admits that Plaintiff and Plaintiff's husband, Decarlos Wellington, filed a civil action assigned case no. 18CV001954 against Lake Health and Brooks in the Lake County Court of Common Pleas on or about November 20, 2018. Lake Health denies that Plaintiff's claims have any merit, and further denies all remaining allegations in Paragraph 168 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint. .
169. In response to Paragraph 169 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health states that the allegations in Paragraph 169 relate to a claim against a party other than Lake Health, and that no response to these allegations on behalf of Lake Health is required. To the extent any response on behalf of Lake Health is required, Lake Health states that the referenced text messages speak for themselves. Lake Health denies Plaintiff's characterization of the contents, purpose, authority, or intent of the referenced text messages. Lake Health denies all remaining allegations in Paragraph 169 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
170. In response to Paragraph 170 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health states that the allegations in Paragraph 170 relate to a claim against a party other than Lake Health, and that no response to these allegations on behalf of Lake Health is required. To the extent any response on behalf of Lake Health is required, Lake Health states that it is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations in Paragraph 170 of Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint, and therefore denies the same.
171. In response to Paragraph 171 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health states that the allegations in Paragraph 171 relate to a claim against a party other than Lake Health, and that no response to these allegations on behalf of Lake Health is required. To the extent any response on behalf of Lake Health is required, Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 171 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
172. In response to Paragraph 172 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health states that the allegations in Paragraph 172 relate to a claim against a party other than Lake Health, and that no response to these allegations on behalf of Lake Health is required. To the extent any response on behalf of Lake Health is required, Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 172 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
173. In response to Paragraph 173 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health states that the allegations in Paragraph 173 relate to a claim against a party other than Lake Health, and that no response to these allegations on behalf of Lake Health is required. To the extent any response on behalf of Lake Health is required, Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 173 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
174. In response to Paragraph 174 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health states that the allegations in Paragraph 174 relate to a claim against a party other than Lake Health, and that no response to these allegations on behalf of Lake Health is required. To the extent any response on behalf of Lake Health is required, Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 174 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
175. Lake Health incorporates its responses to Paragraphs 1 through 174 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint as if fully stated herein.
176. Lake Health admits the allegations in Paragraph 176 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
177. In response to the allegations in Paragraph 177 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health states that the referenced separation form speaks for itself. Lake Health denies Plaintiff's characterization of the contents, purpose, authority, or intent of the referenced separation form. Lake Health denies all remaining allegations in Paragraph 177 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
178. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 178 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
179. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 179 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
180. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 180 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint.
181. Lake Health denies the allegations in Paragraph 181 of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, and controverts the prayer for relief immediately following Paragraph 181 of Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint.
For its affirmative defenses to the allegations in Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint, Lake Health states as follows:
1. Plaintiff's claims are barred by Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
2. Plaintiff's claims for fraudulent inducement and fraudulent misrepresentation are barred by Fed. R. Civ. P. 9(b).
3. Some or all of Plaintiff's claims are barred by her failure to exhaust statutory and/or administrative remedies, including administrative remedies through the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended.
4. Some or all of Plaintiff's claims are barred for failure to mitigate damages, if any.
5. Some or all of Plaintiffs claims are barred by unclean hands.
6. Some or all of Plaintiffs claims are barred by consent.
7. Some or all of Plaintiff's claims are barred by waiver.
8. Some or all of Plaintiffs claims are barred by estoppel.
9. Some or all of Plaintiff's claims are barred by fraud.
10. Plaintiff's claims for defamation/defamation per se are barred by the defense of truth.
11. Plaintiff's claims for defamation/defamation per se are barred by the protections afforded under the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States and Article I, § 11 of the Constitution of the State of Ohio.
12. Some or all of Plaintiff's claims are barred by failure and/or absence of consideration.
13. Some or all of Plaintiff's claims are barred by the economic loss doctrine.
14. Lake Health's actions were at all times taken for legitimate, non-discriminatory and non-retaliatory reasons.
15. Some or all of Plaintiff's claims are barred under Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, 524 U.S. 775 (1998) and Burlington Industries, Inc. v. Ellerth, 524 U.S. 742 (1998). Specifically, Lake Health exercised reasonable care to prevent any sexually harassing behavior, and Plaintiff unreasonably failed to take advantage of any preventive or corrective opportunities provided by Lake Health or to otherwise avoid harm.
16. Lake Health reserves the right to raise additional affirmative defenses as the same may become known during the course of discovery of the within action.
1. Dismiss Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint against Lake Health with prejudice on all counts;
2. Order an award of court costs, reasonable attorneys' fees, and other reasonable expenses incurred in connection with the defense of this action to Lake Health; and
3. Order any further relief that this Court deems just and proper.
1. Defendant Lake Hospital System, Inc. ("Lake Health") brings this counterclaim to redress the intentional and unlawful destruction and spoliation of evidence directly relevant to the above-captioned civil action by Plaintiff Stacey Wellington ("Wellington").
2. As developed herein, Wellington's brief employment with Lake Health was fraught with conflict and drama arising from her belligerent and erratic behavior towards fellow Lake Health colleagues and third parties. Despite his best efforts to mentor and guide Wellington, Wellington's direct supervisor Phillip Brooks ("Brooks") ultimately made the decision to terminate Wellington's employment after he received numerous complaints from subordinates about Wellington's toxic attitude and behavior.
3. Prior to her termination, Wellington routinely complained about her colleagues, often directly to Brooks. Wellington even went so far as to complain directly to Lake Health's human resources department about her female colleagues after they insisted on following hospital protocol in response to a request Wellington made for her husband's medical information. Despite compiling a voluminous record of emails complaining to Brooks and to human resources about her co-workers, Wellington never once made a written complaint to anyone about alleged sexual harassment by Phillip Brooks.
4. The first time Wellington made any complaint to Lake Health about alleged sexual harassment was following her for-cause termination on October 5, 2018. As part of her post-termination complaints, Wellington advised Lake Health that she had audio recordings of Brooks that would substantiate her allegations of harassment. Wellington made similar claims to Action Management recruiter Dale Chorba, who was told by Wellington that she possessed audio recordings of him that would support her narrative of sexual harassment and retaliation.
5. Wellington has failed to produce these recordings in response to specific requests for production served upon her by Lake Health in this case. Upon information and belief, Wellington destroyed her audio recordings of Brooks and Chorba because the actual content of these now-destroyed recordings would have contradicted the false narrative of sexual harassment that Wellington began to propagate following her termination from Lake Health. As a result, Lake Health's ability to defend this case has been made significantly more difficult, requiring additional unnecessary investigation and discovery.
6. Lake Health is a not-for-profit corporation organized under the laws of the State of Ohio with its principal place of business in Concord, Lake County, Ohio.
7. Wellington is an individual and citizen of the State of Ohio residing in Mentor, Lake County, Ohio.
8. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Lake Health's counterclaim.
9. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Wellington.
10. Venue is proper in this judicial district.
11. In July 2018, Wellington was referred to Lake Health for potential employment by Dale Chorba of Action Management, a third-party executive search and recruitment firm.
12. On July 26, 2018, Wellington interviewed with Brooks, Lake Health's Vice President of Revenue Cycle.
13. Upon information and belief, Wellington made a surreptitious audio recording of her interview with Brooks.
14. On August 3, 2018, Lake Health extended an offer of employment to Wellington as Director of Utilization Review.
15. Unbeknownst to Lake Health, Wellington had a history of domestic violence, criminal charges, and dishonesty that rendered her unsuitable for employment at Lake Health.
16. For example, and shortly before she returned to Ohio in 2018, Wellington made false and salacious allegations against a Florida dental office. In pertinent part, Wellington claimed that she had been given wine and a "foot massage" by a dental assistant, who subsequently gave her an oral "infection" by performing dental work after the "foot massage." In reality, Wellington requested the "foot massage" from the dental assistant and the "infection" was preexisting. Wellington reported her false and defamatory allegations against the dental office to a local TV news station, which ran the story on television but later retracted it and publically apologized for the "errors" in the story.
17. Wellington commenced her employment at Lake Health on August 21, 2018.
18. Wellington's immediate supervisor was Phillip Brooks.
19. From the onset of her employment at Lake Health, Wellington exhibited a confrontational and erratic attitude that impeded her ability to form trusting relationships with her colleagues and make progress in her new position.
20. Even so, Wellington enjoyed working with Brooks and frequently sought out his attention. On August 31, 2018, for example, Wellington followed-up on an email exchange with Brooks about Lake Health's dress code by asking about Brooks' underwear. In response to Brooks writing, "You're funny... meeting the attire requirements today?" Wellington replied, "Are you? What about the undergarments..." See LHS-013695 (attached hereto as
21. Despite Brooks' attempts to guide and mentor Wellington, she continued to engage in erratic, unprofessional behavior and engender personal conflict with her co-workers.
22. During a September 20, 2018 conference call with the national medical director for Anthem Insurance, for example, Wellington hit the "mute" button the telephone and told her colleagues, "Watch me fuck this bitch up!" Wellington's Lake Health colleagues were shocked and offended by this callous display of threatening behavior toward a senior executive of a national insurance company.
23. On other occasions, Wellington engaged in profane speech around the office, saying, "everyone around here is so fucking stupid!" and "Phil [Brooks] is so fucking stupid!" These comments were heard and witnessed by Lake Health employees.
24. Far from being a victim of sexual harassment, Wellington perpetuated a cycle of conflict and drama throughout her short tenure at Lake Health. The events of September 27, 2018 are a prime example. Earlier that day, Stacey Wellington's husband, Decarlos Wellington, called Lake Health employee Karen Chiofolo via telephone and requested that certain medical records of his be released to Stacey Wellington. Ms. Chiofolo was uncomfortable releasing patient information without a signed release as required by Lake Health policy, and asked Maria Bongiovanni, Manager of Revenue Cycle, for assistance. Ms. Bongiovanni instructed Ms. Chiofolo to inform Mr. Wellington that he would be contacted by management regarding his request. Later that afternoon, Robin LaRosa, Team Lead of Revenue Cycle, contacted Mr. Wellington to inform him of Lake Health's policy not to release medical records without a signed release. Ms. LaRosa subsequently mailed the requested medical records directly to Mr. Wellington that same day.
25. Upon learning that her husband's records would not be released to her directly, and that her husband's request had been dealt with by her colleagues in accordance with Lake Health policy, Wellington contacted Kimberly Lehotsky in Lake Health's Human Resources department to complain about what she perceived to be a "HIPAA violation." Wellington followed-up with several emails to Ms. Lehotsky following her initial phone call. None of these emails made any reference whatsoever to complaints of sexual harassment.
26. Wellington's final email to Kim Lehotsky on September 27 stated the "matter" had been resolved and that no intervention by human resources was necessary:
LHS-002964 (attached hereto as
27. Despite telling Kim Lehotsky that the matter she had been complaining about had been resolved, Wellington sent an angry email to Robert Parris, Director of Patient Financial Services, the following morning to reiterate her complaints about events of the previous day:
LHS-006029 (attached hereto as
28. Wellington's September 28, 2018 email to Robert Parris leaves no room for doubt that the only issue she had raised on September 27, 2018 was the alleged mishandling of her request for her husband's medical information. No allegation of "sexual harassment" or "bullying" is reported in this email. To the contrary, Wellington expressly stated in this correspondence that she liked working for Phillip Brooks and followed Brooks' instructions for dealing with the events of September 27.
29. Following her email to Mr. Parris, Wellington wrote to Kimberly Lehotsky again to update her on the situation. See LHS-012365 (attached hereto as
30. By any measure, the events of September 27, 2018 (which had nothing to do with any alleged sexual harassment) were blown entirely out of proportion by Wellington, and led to even more personal conflict between her and her co-workers. The tension and animosity that increasingly characterized Wellington's relationship with her peers was highlighted in an email sent by Wellington to Brooks on October 2, 2018:
Hello I will not complain about Things that I cannot change or that we're not done— is there a way you can please make sure that and thrive when they leave or not still calling into the conference is or sending and getting emails. This is still happening on the you our side. Also Shelley I just want you to know before she left changed up a few of my reports with the IT department and upset all of the gatekeepers I had to call IT and get it switched all around. She also changed my scheduling with my nurses without telling me before she left.
LHS-006006 (attached hereto as
31. By this point, Brooks could no longer tolerate Wellington's unprofessional, confrontational, and abrasive attitude, which was eroding morale and negatively impacting her colleagues. On the afternoon of October 2, Brooks emailed Lake Health's Vice President for Human Resources, Craig Ghidotti, to reiterate his concerns about Wellington and provide support for his decision to terminate her employment. See LHS-004241 (attached hereto as
32. Forwarding Wellington's earlier email, Brooks wrote: "Here we go again. I've never had a director that cannot remedy benign issues on their own. This is the drama I was referencing, everyday it's something or another." See
33. Brooks communicated his decision to Wellington during a meeting in Brooks' office at approximately 9:00 a.m. on October 5, 2018. Following this meeting, Wellington sent an email to Brooks acknowledging her termination and complaining about various workplace issues and perceived slights. Notably absent from Wellington's complaints was any allegation of sexual harassment:
Hello,
LHS-006011 (attached hereto as
34. Critically, Wellington's October 5, 2018 9:39 a.m. email to Brooks acknowledged,
35. Although Wellington's October 5, 2018 email to Brooks recites several grievances against Brooks and other co-workers, it makes no mention whatsoever of any sexual harassment. It was only several hours later — after Wellington realized that she needed to concoct a legal basis to challenge Brooks' termination decision — that she began to send emails to Lake Health's human resources department and others complaining of alleged sexual harassment.
36. One of these emails, which was originally sent by Wellington to Dale Chorba of Action Management and subsequently forwarded by Wellington to Lake Health's Vice President for Human Resources Craig Ghidotti, made explicit reference to Wellington's audio recording of her interview with Brooks. Wellington claimed this recording would substantiate her allegations of sexual harassment:
LHS-000444 (attached hereto as
37. Wellington's post-termination emails to Lake Health's human resources office also discussed the prospect of litigation between Wellington and Lake Health. For example, on October 5, 2018 at 5:38 p.m., Wellington wrote the following in an email to Craig Ghidotti:
Good afternoon Craig this is one of multiple emails this was after our brief conversation this morning between me and Philip. [...] I'm not gonna send any more of these I have them all printed out ready for you guys. I am in disbelief it what is happening right now more importantly I have a family to support.
LHS-000513 (attached hereto as
38. The following Monday, October 8, 2018 at 2:18 p.m., Wellington wrote to Mr. Ghidotti again to inform him that she intended to file a charge with the United States Equal Opportunity Employment Commission ("EEOC"):
LHS-000765 (attached hereto as
39. As evidenced by her emails, Wellington was acutely aware of the prospect of litigation between herself and Lake Health on October 5, 2018.
40. After receiving her barrage of self-serving and accusatory emails, Lake Health's Human Resources office conducted an investigation into Wellington's allegations. As part of this investigation, Lake Health's Vice President for Human Resources Craig Ghidotti offered to personally meet with Wellington.
41. Wellington refused to meet with Mr. Ghidotti unless she was paid.
42. Mr. Ghidotti also requested any documentation supporting Wellington's allegations of hostile work environment sexual harassment. In response to this request, Wellington failed to produce the audio recording mentioned in her October 5, 2018 email.
43. On October 25, 2018, Mr. Ghidotti sent correspondence to Wellington informing her that his investigation had not uncovered any evidence in support of her allegations of hostile work environment sexual harassment.
44. That same day, Wellington left a voicemail message for Dale Chorba, the Action Management recruiter who helped place Wellington at Lake Health. In pertinent part, Wellington's voicemail stated, "Hi, Dale. This is Stacey Wellington. I must say I am a little distraught that you never called me back; however, I did make note of our conversation ten days prior to Philip, legally and very illegally terminating me.
45. As stated in her October 5, 2018 email and in her October 25, 2018 voicemail, Wellington at one point possessed audio recordings of her initial interview with Phillip Brooks and her telephone calls with Dale Chorba.
46. On February 21, 2019, Lake Health served its First Requests for Production of Documents on Wellington. Those requests asked for "all documents relating to any complaints or reports of discrimination, harassment, or suspected criminal activity that you made to or about Lake Health and/or Brooks" and "all documents and communications relating to any claim or defense in this Action." The term "document(s)" was specifically defined to include audio recordings.
47. Wellington failed to produce the audio recordings referenced in her October 5, 2018 email and October 25, 2018 voicemail in response to these requests.
48. On March 26, 2019, Lake Health served its Second Requests for Production of Documents on Wellington. This time, Lake Health specifically requested "any audio recordings of your initial interview with Phillip Brooks" and "any audio recordings that you made of Phillip Brooks."
49. Wellington's responses, which were served on counsel for Lake Health on May 6, 2019, stated "none" in response to each of the foregoing requests.
50. On May 21, 2019 counsel for Lake Health wrote to counsel for Wellington to request supplementation of her responses to Lake Health's written discovery requests. With respect to Lake Health's request for audio recordings, counsel's letter stated:
51. Counsel for Wellington responded to this correspondence on July 1, 2019. Plaintiff's counsel's response failed to confirm whether the audio recordings requested in Lake Health's Second Requests for Production never existed or had been destroyed.
52. Upon information and belief, Wellington destroyed the audio recordings of her initial interview with Phillip Brooks and her phone calls with Dale Chorba at some point after October 5, 2018.
53. Upon information and belief, Wellington destroyed the aforementioned audio recordings because they either implicate Wellington in unprofessional and profane behavior and/or evidence the absence of any such behavior on the part of Phillip Brooks. Nevertheless, and in an attempt to prop up her false narrative of sexual harassment, Wellington led Lake Health and Mr. Chorba to believe that these recordings that would substantiate her allegations. Knowing full well that her audio recordings did not evidence any sexual harassment by Brooks, Wellington destroyed them rather than turn them over to Lake Health in discovery.
54. Lake Health's ability to defend the above-captioned matter has been materially harmed by Wellington's willful and malicious destruction of unquestionably relevant evidence, which has forced Lake Health to conduct additional, unnecessary discovery and is impeding Lake Health's ability to defend this case on the merits.
55. Lake Health incorporates all preceding allegations as if fully set forth herein.
56. "In Ohio, spoliation is recognized as an independent cause of action." Heimberger v. Zeal Hotel Group, Ltd., 10th Dist. No. 15AP-99, 2015-Ohio-3845, 42 N.E.3d 323, ¶ 36.
57. On October 5, 2018 and October 25, 2018, Wellington informed Lake Health and Dale Chorba, respectively, that she possessed audio recordings relevant to her allegations in the above-captioned matter.
58. At the time she made these statements, Wellington was aware of probable litigation between herself and Lake Health.
59. Subsequent to October 5, 2018, Wellington willfully destroyed her audio recordings of Brooks and Chorba. Wellington did so in an effort to disrupt Lake Health's defense of the above-captioned civil action.
60. Lake Health's ability to defend the above-captioned matter has been disrupted and impaired by Wellington's destruction of the audio recordings that she claimed would substantiate her allegations of sexual harassment. Upon information and belief, these recordings demonstrated an absence of harassing behavior by Brooks and/or implicated Wellington in profane and inappropriate speech or behavior.
61. Lake Health has been damaged by Wellington's willful destruction of evidence. Lake Health has incurred attorneys' fees and costs in an attempt to obtain these recordings in discovery, and will continue to be damaged by its inability to use these recordings to successfully defend the above-captioned matter.
