ShareThis Page
News

Magee-Womens Hospital, fired secretary sign settlement

| Tuesday, Dec. 9, 2008, 12:00 p.m.

UPMC lawyers and a former Magee-Womens Hospital secretary on Monday finally agreed on terms that will end a four-year battle over her firing.

A "full and final" confidential agreement was announced by UPMC attorney William Pietragallo during a brief hearing before Allegheny County Common Pleas Judge Eugene Strassburger. The details were finalized in Strassburger's chambers.

Magee lawyers handed over a check for former secretary Donna Kovacs, who was present to sign the agreement.

Kovacs sued her former employer, charging she was wrongfully terminated in 2004, in violation of a state whistleblower law, for raising questions about recordkeeping and quality of patient care.

The hospital contended Kovacs violated patient confidentiality by improperly accessing and printing patient records.

Though a jury trial was halted in mid-November because of an apparent settlement, the negotiations later broke down. Yesterday, all parties appeared visibly relieved the matter was settled.

Records show that after Kovacs was terminated a little over four years ago, hospital officials challenged her eligibility to collect unemployment benefits, arguing her firing was justified.

In a 2005 hearing before a state referee, hospital officials contended they had evidence Kovacs violated patient confidentiality. The hearing officer, however, concluded the hospital failed to prove its case and substantiate charges of "willful misconduct." A state unemployment review board adopted the referee's findings.

Magee appealed that decision to Commonwealth Court, which upheld the board's decision. In a May 2005 decision, Judge Rochelle S. Friedman concluded benefits could not be withheld "on the basis of hearsay alone" and noted the hospital's sole witness "had no firsthand knowledge of any inappropriate behavior" by Kovacs.

Though terms of yesterday's agreement were not disclosed, some details emerged in a court hearing last week and a brief order Strassburger issued. The judge ruled the agreement would not include a provision Magee sought to limit Kovacs' testimony about alleged violations of state and federal law at the hospital in two pending whistleblower lawsuits. The judge concluded that would force Kovacs to lie.

Also in dispute were provisions UPMC sought to bar Kovacs from employment at any of its facilities, even those it might later acquire.

Magee lawyers yesterday said they would drop an appeal of Strassburger's order filed last week with state Superior Court. Kovacs' lawyer, Vicki Kuftic Horne, agreed to drop sanctions motions against Magee and its lawyers.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.

click me