Bowling v. MARGARET R. PARDEE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL

N.C. Ct. App.October 17, 2006No. No. COA 05-1497Cited 9 times

Defendant WinMARGARET R. PARDEE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL

Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s): Wynn
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling: Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached: appeal from interlocutory order dismissing claim; substantial right appeal allowed despite two claims remaining at trial level

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Wrongful TerminationDisability Discrimination

Outcome

Trial court's dismissal of plaintiff's North Carolina Persons with Disabilities Protection Act claim was affirmed because plaintiff had commenced a concurrent EEOC claim, which divested state court jurisdiction under N.C.G.S. § 168A-11(c).

Excerpt

1. Appeal and Error — appealability — interlocutory order — substantial right Although plaintiff's appeal from the trial court's order dismissing his claim under the North Carolina Persons with Disabilities Protection Act is an appeal from an interlocutory orderPage 816 based on the fact that two claims remain at the trial level, plaintiff is entitled to immediate appeal based on a substantial right, because: (1) plaintiff's North Carolina Disabilities Act claim and his claim for wrongful discharge in violation of public policy, which remains at the trial court level, unquestionably involve the same facts and circumstances; and (2) if the appeal is refused, two trials and possibly inconsistent verdicts could result. 2. Disabilities — North Carolina Persons with Disabilities Protection Act — Americans with Disabilities Act — Equal Employment Opportunity Commission claim commenced — concurrent jurisdiction not allowed The trial court did not err by dismissing plaintiff's claim under the North Carolina Persons with Disabilities Protection Act (NC Disabilities Act) pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 168A-11(c) after plaintiff commenced an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) claim, because: (1) the General Assembly has disallowed concurrent jurisdiction over an NC Disabilities Act claim and an Americans with Disabilities Act claim that arises out of the same facts and circumstances; (2) plaintiff's claim was still being investigated at the EEOC at the time of his state court filing thus making it fall within the NC Disabilities Act's language of "commenced federal administrative proceedings" and thereby removing it from the subject matter jurisdiction of the state court; and (3) the fact that defendant's motion to dismiss was not heard until after the EEOC had issued plaintiff's righ

What This Ruling Means

**What Happened** Mr. Bowling worked at Margaret R. Pardee Memorial Hospital and was fired from his job. He believed the hospital wrongfully terminated him because of his disability and that his firing violated public policy. Bowling filed a lawsuit in state court under North Carolina's disability protection law, claiming the hospital discriminated against him. **The Court's Decision** The court ruled against Bowling and dismissed his disability discrimination claim. The reason was technical but important: Bowling had also filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) at the same time he sued in state court. Under North Carolina law, when someone files an EEOC complaint, the state court loses the authority to hear the same disability discrimination claim. **Why This Matters for Workers** This case highlights a crucial timing issue for workers facing disability discrimination. If you file both an EEOC complaint and a state court lawsuit at the same time in North Carolina, you may lose your right to pursue the state court case. Workers should carefully consider their options and timing when filing discrimination claims, as pursuing multiple legal paths simultaneously can sometimes backfire and limit your legal remedies.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse more:Wrongful Termination cases Disability Discrimination cases

Similar Rulings

Con Ed v. NLRB

U.S. Supreme CourtDec 1938

Mixed Result

Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board

U.S. Supreme CourtFeb 1951

Republic Aviation Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board

U.S. Supreme CourtApr 1945

Plaintiff Win

Mastro Plastics Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board

U.S. Supreme CourtJun 1956

Plaintiff Win

Read Full Opinion More MARGARET R. PARDEE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL Rulings All Rulings

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

Check My Rights Learn the Basics

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.