case number nineteen dash three to six nebraska mary canning versus crighton university judge also note that mess hall is joining by telephone conference only so there's no video six asking for a reversal only man her claims were age discrimination retaliation that a claim for being regarded as disabled we're claiming obviously that the facts were hotly disputed  complex cases page for twelve and other said she was a hard working conscientious rest for twenty nine dollars on the disability discrimination claim the district court erred on her st that was the st claim for the outcome of the legal issue which was whether she was a qualified person the legal issue was dictated of course by forty two u s c twelve thousand one hundred and twelve that's the definition of qualified person the clinical competency committee ovens of regular adverse action taken before her terminations number two was there a causal connection after her protected activity to any adverse actions by overlooking eight months of continually escalating adverse actions the district court took the question of causation away from the finder of fact and set her terminations for term a nation was to long for when her lawyer wrote his demand letter overlooking everything in  between the rd legal question was with the series about st actions dissuade reasonable employees from the protected activity while the district court erred by failing to adhere to the burlington northern test we argued because that's you asked the was on the committee herself that the committee told the st examining and the psychologist basically what to say and there's a question of whether the psychologist wrote it or did the c c c committee write it  they regarded her as having dementia or anxiety producing substance abuse anxiety yes it did come from the very start but then it just kept going they computer problems but no it also says these other reasons they regarded her in the record over and over again as having cognitive problems and by the way when she was finally terminated  agreement is something that you do without duress she was told to so it was under duress she didn't have choice other than to give her all of her rights so i have to say no she  did it under duress she was told to but back to the rumination case also this continuum was that the district court said that she lacked medical knowledge and that was the reason for the spiral a sense well number one it was a fireball offense for anybody nobody's ever been fired for what she did it was an error of omission the other thing was all of the evidence of her supposedly lack of medical knowledge was disputed because she had all of these favorable reviews both before and after she went back so it was false to say she lacked medical knowledge it was false to say she didn't understand her error of page one hundred and forty six it was false to say her arrow commission required terminations and it was false to say that the error was committed under direct supervision page one  serious putting a patient very serious risk it and i can point to the page right this minute but i think the whole thing was missed described as being something it wasn't it was a lack of knowledge is what different than  is that when they reported this error dr kathy was saying over and over again to the committee that that my client with direct supervision at that time she was not and that and by the way never show that dr to kathy herself that she's never heard of anyone being terminated for that ever and also dr griffin stating no one gets terminated for that type of error it wasn't a miss prescription it was an omitted prescription so it being an error of omission is common and by the way when i was trying to talk about the pharmacist the record shows that creighton has its pharmacists come talk to residents about tackling these three year program you start out with physicians who have medical degrees over a three year period they are given progressively more responsibility with the goal of moving them from being supervised to training for physicians in and out for medical schools is there firm they do not have exposure to patients at the undergraduate level during the eight year period between when she graduated know that that is now allegations that she's made that she was not given proper training it really you know that i don't think that there's a dispute that there were probably difficulties doing that december that clinical competency committee which is made up of a the factory members the term medicine area met and concluded that she was not meeting the expectations and had not progress to the point where you would training that other st year internal medicine residents who were coming from craig emerson other medical school she was not used to dealing with asians managing patients and so she agreed information all of this is in d the written document she's karen and it was suggested that she needed to have some assistance in story now doubt there were concerns about whether there was so kind of a learning than the fact that she was fifty seven what was the basis for making deb require there were concerns that are reflected in her values way shame that she was having trouble processing word and he's the one who said this would be beneficial but the thing is i think nothing nothing came of that in terms of any kind of adverse actions or her she was paid the whole time there's no dispute that she continued on a leave of absence she started her purse year over again and was experiencing the same problems and again that th less complex than hospital based patients and the physicians who had concerns about her were those that were working with her in the hospital and obviously twen physician who is interested on how they're going to end up being a clinic or hospital so they need to be able to cover the responsibilities and with biggest concern they have and this is there's a number comments about this and  more supervision in fact there were concerns that she was taking away the supervisors attention from other injuries he needed supervisions well she just wasn't able to handle the situation and that led ultimately that the patient was on the eyolf and they got the patient stabilized and dr can as a part of the discharge was going to release the patient with coumadin even though that was the not a stellar resident made a mistake she was a struggling resident who had great difficulty who made an error and it was really reflective of the issues that they had seen throughout the time and i thought i would especially the men with her age or any perceived disability or because they received the whole a letter from or evidence anyone else ever made this area dr griffin said it happened a couple of times not it's so common and crazy that their doctor faculty member it's so common they have their pharmacist talking to the residents about what is a common problem she was treated differently going back to the very st time december th he was voted out of off the island by the else for months satisfactory evaluations all the sudden come up with all these things that have just been told to you because there was a decision at some point early on that they were going to get rid of this older and we don't know why but we know that the reason given were faults that she didn't have medical knowledge even in the record the court said it was an error mission dr griffin testified it was an error of mission even d termination letter said it was an error ople mission she did not lack of medical knowledge she was getting satisfactory evaluations for a st year resident who'd been treated the way she had been treated from the start so  the other points i wanted to cover very quickly if i still have time he said she was unable to handle complex cases when she returned the nd part of her tenure that was repeatedly told to her that she was unable to think clearly she was confused she was repeatedly harassed with this disparaging remarks and shown that in our in our predicts the other thing about supposedly her needing more supervision confessed and she admitted that her medical school training was different than if you and medical schooling united states and they accepted her anyway so that was part of the fact that she was going to need a little more supervision on certain aspects but they all for the fact is the older faculty got along famously with her they wrote special recommendation letters for her and treated her very well and thought highly of her thought she was just like the other residents was the way it was stated one of the other things was that  the exam that he referenced early on those were practice exams so of those are treated like practice exams we lawyers were graded on their l s a t practice exams which we can never get admitted to law school  any of her medical knowledge or medical caulked ition or anything it had to do with the fact that she couldn't operate the computer system that they they didn't treat her so i think i've made most of the remarks and going to make your honor we would ask you to reverse the case