Preview:

REPORTED IN THE COURT OF SPECIAL APPEALS OF MARYLAND No. 1866 SEPTEMBER TERM, 1994 ___________________________________

ROBERT FULTON BAGWELL, JR. v. PENINSULA REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, et al. ___________________________________ Fischer Harrell, Hollander, JJ. ___________________________________ Opinion by Hollander, J. ___________________________________ Filed: September 28, 1995

Robert Fulton Bagwell, Jr., appellant, was terminated from his employment as a Special Commissioned Police Officer at Peninsula Regional Medical Center ("Peninsula").1 Thereafter, he filed suit

in the Circuit Court for Wicomico County against Peninsula, Alonzo Tull (head of Peninsula's security division), Craig Koppenhaver (Peninsula's Director of Personnel), and Jeffrey Corrigan (Peninsula's Vice President of Human Resources), appellees herein. In

his Second Amended Complaint, Bagwell asserted a plethora of claims against appellees: breach of contract, abusive discharge,

intentional interference with contractual relations, intentional interference with prospective relations, defamation, invasion of privacy/false light, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and negligent investigation. The court granted appellees's motion for summary judg-

ment on all counts.2 Appellant presents one broad issue for our review: "Whether

the trial judge erred in granting, without a hearing, Appellees' Motion for Summary Judgment as to all causes of action asserted by Appellant." He contends that the court erred in failing to recog-

When Bagwell was hired, Peninsula was known as Peninsula General Hospital Medical Center. It was renamed in December 1991. Bagwell filed his Second Amended Complaint in conjunction with his response to appellees' motion for summary judgment. Thereafter, appellees filed a motion to strike the Second Amended Complaint, but the court never directly resolved the motion to strike. We shall assume, for the purposes of this appeal, that the court denied the motion to strike when it entered judgment against Bagwell.
2

1

nize actual disputes of material fact. shall affirm.

As we perceive no error, we

Factual Background The summary of facts that follows was gleaned from the pleadings and the evidence produced in connection with appellees' motion for summary judgment. To the extent there is any factual dispute,

we have cast the facts in the light most favorable to Bagwell, as we are reviewing the trial court's resolution of the motion for summary judgment. On December 4, 1989, Peninsula, a hospital located in Salisbury, Maryland, hired Bagwell as a security officer.3 did not execute a written contract of employment. The parties

But, upon hiring

Bagwell, Peninsula gave him a copy of its "Employee's Handbook," which discusses, among other things, the hospital's policies on discipline and termination. Bagwell was supervised by Tull who, in Bagwell's duties pri-

turn, reported to Koppenhaver and Corrigan.

marily concerned controlling the flow of visitors in the hospital emergency room, and occasionally assisting in controlling violent patients. For about two and a half years, all of Bagwell's job

performance evaluations were exemplary.

Bagwell was appointed by the Governor as a "Special Commissioned Police Officer" pursuant to Md. Ann. Code of 1957, Art. 41

Download Bagwell v. Peninsula.pdf

Maryland Law