Anna-Marie Wilson, M.D. v. West Virginia University School of Medicine, Department of OB/GYN (Memorandum Decision)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS Anna-Marie Wilson, M.D., Petitioner Below, Petitioner FILED October 21, 2011 R O R Y L. P E R R Y II, C LE R K S U P R E M E C O U R T O F AP P E ALS vs) No. 11-0600 (Monongalia County 07-C-AP-26) O F W E S T V IR G IN IA West Virginia University School of Medicine, Department of OB/GYN, Respondent Below, Respondent MEMORANDUM DECISION Petitioner Anna-Marie Wilson, M.D., appeals the circuit court's order affirming the decision of the Public Employee s Grievance Board to deny her employment grievance. This Court has considered the parties briefs and the record on appeal. Pursuant to Rule 1(d) of the Revised Rules of Appellate Procedure, this Court is of the opinion that this case is appropriate for consideration under the Revised Rules. The facts and legal arguments are adequately presented in the parties written briefs and the record on appeal, and the decisional process would not be significantly aided by oral argument. Upon consideration of the standard of review, the briefs, and the record presented, the Court finds no substantial question of law and no prejudicial error. For these reasons, a memorandum decision is appropriate under Rule 21 of the Revised Rules. Petitioner asserts that she was wrongfully terminated from a residency program operated by the Respondent West Virginia University School of Medicine. Respondent asserts that petitioner s residency was terminated because of deficient performance. The grievance board and circuit court upheld the termination. This Court reviews decisions of the circuit court under the same standard as that by which the circuit court reviews the decision of the [administrative law judge]. Martin v. Randolph County Bd. of Educ., 195 W.Va. 297, 304, 465 S.E.2d 399, 406 (1995). Pursuant to this standard, a party may appeal the decision of an administrative law judge on the grounds that the decision is, inter alia, contrary to law or a lawfully adopted rule or written policy of the employer; is clearly wrong in view of the reliable, probative and substantial evidence on the whole record; or is arbitrary or capricious or characterized by abuse of discretion. W. Va. Code ยง 6C 2 5(b)(1), (4), and (5), in part. Petitioner argues that the circuit court was clearly wrong in affirming the grievance board s decision as there was evidence that her skills were the equivalent of, or better than, other residents, and the issues cited by respondent did not warrant her termination. The circuit court found that while there were differences in opinion amongst respondent s faculty concerning petitioner s competency, the court would not supplant its own judgment for that of the respondent and grievance board. Indeed, this Court has held that [s]ince a reviewing court is obligated to give deference to factual findings rendered by an administrative law judge, a circuit court is not permitted to substitute its judgment for that of the hearing examiner with regard to factual determinations. Syl. Pt. 1, in part, Cahill v. Mercer County Bd. of Educ., 208 W.Va. 177, 539 S.E.2d 437 (2000). Both parties have made numerous allegations, all of which this Court has carefully reviewed. Upon a review of the arguments and record on appeal, we conclude that the circuit court s order is not contrary to law or written policy, clearly wrong, arbitrary or capricious, or characterized by an abuse of discretion. We attach and incorporate by reference the circuit court s well-reasoned Order Dismissing Petition entered on November 23, 2010. For the foregoing reasons, we affirm. Affirmed. ISSUED: October 21, 2011 CONCURRED IN BY: Acting Justice Justice Justice Chief Justice Menis E. Ketchum Robin Jean Davis Brent D. Benjamin Thomas E. McHugh DISQUALIFIED: Chief Justice Margaret L. Workman Appendix to Memorandum Decision Supreme Court of Appeals Case No. 11-0600 Appendix to Memorandum Decision Supreme Court of Appeals Case No. 11-0600 Appendix to Memorandum Decision Supreme Court of Appeals Case No. 11-0600 Appendix to Memorandum Decision Supreme Court of Appeals Case No. 11-0600 Appendix to Memorandum Decision Supreme Court of Appeals Case No. 11-0600 Appendix to Memorandum Decision Supreme Court of Appeals Case No. 11-0600
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
