Kolette Smith v. Brian Williams, Labetter County Medical Center, d/b/a Labette Health

Wichita, Kansas employment law lawyer represented the Plaintiff.



This case stems from the termination of the independent contractor

relationship between Plaintiff-Appellant, Dr. Kolette Smith, and Defendants-

Appellees, Brian Williams and Labette County Medical Center ("Labette Health”)

(collectively "Defendants”). Dr. Smith appeals from the district court's grant of

summary judgment to Defendants on her claims for (1) denial of a property interest

without due process under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and (2) tortious interference with

prospective business advantage under Kansas law. Smith v. Williams,

* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines

of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for

its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.

arises under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.



Background

The parties do not dispute the material facts of this case. I Aplt. App. 53 n.1.

Dr. Smith is a licensed physician in Kansas. Id. at 53. Labette Health is a county

hospital with its primary facility located in Kansas. Id. at 73–74. Brian Williams has

served as President and CEO of Labette Health since September 2015. Id. at 53.

Dr. Smith worked as a physician at Labette Health from 1999 until January 2018. Id.

This court need not discuss the parties' contractual relationship at length.

Suffice it to say that multiple written agreements reflected Dr. Smith's independent

contractor relationship with Labette Health, but none of those agreements were

signed by all parties. See III Aplt. App. 495–505, 509–18, 523–25. Each of these

agreements contained a non-compete provision stating that Dr. Smith would not

provide health care services at other care entities within a 60-mile driving distance of

Labette Health during the term of the agreement or for two years following its

termination. See id. at 502–03, 516, 524. Labette Health paid Dr. Smith pursuant to

each of the agreements even though they were unsigned. IV Aplt. App. 634. In the

fall of 2017, after failing to negotiate a new independent contractor agreement,

Mr. Williams informed Dr. Smith that Labette Health was terminating all of her

active agreements, and that she would be subject to the non-compete provisions in

those agreements. Id. at 634–35; III Aplt. App. 409–11.



In January 2018, Dr. Smith entered into an independent contractor agreement

Appellate Case: 23-3227 Document: 51-1 Date Filed: 12/18/2024 Page: 2

with Docs Who Care, a company that contracts with hospitals to provide temporary

physician services. II Aplt. App. 174–75, 207–08. This agreement did not guarantee

Dr. Smith any specific hours or shifts. Id. at 178, 208. In the year following her

departure from Labette Health, Dr. Smith worked a total of 2,649 hours through Docs

Who Care at nearly a dozen hospitals around Kansas. Id. at 174–75, 209. Two such

hospitals where Dr. Smith sought and received clinical privileges through Docs Who

Care were Newton Medical Center and McPherson Hospital. I Aplt. App. 60.

In February 2019, Dr. Smith worked a shift at Wilson Medical Center, which

was within the 60-mile radius of the non-compete area. III Aplt. App. 526–31.

Mr. Williams contacted Docs Who Care to inform them that he believed that

Dr. Smith's non-compete agreement was enforceable even though it was unsigned.

Id. at 531–33. Docs Who Care told Mr. Williams that it would honor his request

regarding Dr. Smith. Id. at 527. Mr. Williams then asked that Dr. Smith request an

exception to her non-compete and stated that he would grant the exception. Id.

at 526.



The following month, Docs Who Care told Dr. Smith that Wilson Medical

Center had another shift available for her. II Aplt. App. 193–94. Docs Who Care

informed Dr. Smith that they had Mr. Williams's "okay” in writing, and that the shift

was hers if she wanted it. Id. at 251. Nonetheless, Dr. Smith declined this shift at

Wilson Medical Center. Id. at 194.



Dr. Smith sued Labette Health and Mr. Williams. I Aplt. App. 16–32. After

Appellate Case: 23-3227 Document: 51-1 Date Filed: 12/18/2024 Page: 3

the district court considered motions to dismiss, 1 the remaining claims were for

(1) denial of a property interest under § 1983; (2) tortious interference with

prospective business advantage; (3) false light invasion of privacy; and

(4) defamation. Id. at 60. Both parties filed motions for summary judgment on all

four claims. Id.



The district court found that it was unnecessary to decide whether the parties

had a valid contract because Dr. Smith's claims failed on other grounds. Id. at 62.

First, the court granted Defendants summary judgment on Dr. Smith's § 1983 claim

because it found that "the evidence demonstrates that [Dr. Smith] was able to fully

utilize her medical license after leaving Labette Health[.]” Id. at 63. The court

emphasized Dr. Smith's hours of work at various hospitals after leaving Labette

Heath and found that there was "no evidence showing that Defendants' actions

destroyed the value or utility of [Dr. Smith's] medical license[.]” Id.

Next, the district court granted Defendants summary judgment on Dr. Smith's

tortious interference with prospective business advantage claim. Id. at 64. The court

first rejected Dr. Smith's arguments that she lost business expectancies at Newton

Medical Center and McPherson Hospital because in both instances she received

clinical privileges at those hospitals. Id. The court then rejected Dr. Smith's

argument that she lost a business expectancy at Wilson Medical Center because "the

1evidence demonstrates that Defendants' actions did not cause the loss of this

'business expectancy,' but rather Plaintiff turned it down.” Id. at 65.

The district court also granted Defendants summary judgment on Dr. Smith's

false light invasion of privacy and defamation claims, but Dr. Smith does not

challenge those rulings on appeal.

Affirmed