Fired Alberta medical examiner's wrongful dismissal trial resumes
The lawyer representing fired Alberta chief medical examiner Dr. Anny Sauvageau faced a barrage of tough questions from the judge set to decide her wrongful dismissal lawsuit later this year.
Sauvageau's civil case resumed Tuesday after a long break. Court of Queen's Bench Justice Doreen Sulyma heard arguments from Allan Garber, Sauvageau's lawyer, as well as Craig Neuman, who is defending the Alberta government against the $7.5 million lawsuit.
Sauvageau claims her contract as Alberta's top forensic pathologist was not renewed in 2014 because she stood up to political interference in her office. Neuman, on the other hand, painted Sauvageau as a poor manager and employee who took an “excessive view of what her independence entailed.”
Sauvageau's trial began in early April and next resumes in September. Shortly after the start of the trial, former Progressive Conservative justice minister Jonathan Denis was found in contempt of court for a letter accusing Sauvageau of defaming him in her privileged testimony.
Originally from Quebec, Sauvageau was hired in 2011 to replace Alberta's longtime chief medical examiner, Dr. Graeme Dowling. She testified Dowling told her she could stay in the role as long as she wanted and that the fixed contract she signed was simply a formality.
Dowling remained on in the medical examiner's department after stepping down as chief, and grew concerned about how Sauvageau “treated people in the office,” Neuman said Tuesday. Over the years, the relationship between Sauvageau and her justice ministry superiors broke down, largely over issues related to the independence of the medical examiner's office.
During her testimony, Sauvageau claimed she was defending the impartiality of her office from a campaign by the Alberta Funeral Service Association, which opposed new body transport contracts Sauvageau sought to implement. She also sought assurances about her office's independence after high-profile news reports over deaths of children in provincial care.
Neuman, on the other hand, said the office of the chief medical examiner (OCME) is independent insofar as determining the cause and manner of death, and that anything past that was the ministry's responsibility.
He said Sauvageau remains “adamantly attached” to her interpretation of the OCME'S independence, and that the office's “true statutory independence was confined to a much smaller sphere than she thought it was.”
Neuman concluded by urging Sulyma to reject the claim that Dowling, assistant deputy ministry Maryann Everett and others in the ministry “deliberately set out ... to end the plaintiff's tenure as chief medical examiner.”
Garber, Sauvageau's lawyer, faced a steady stream of questions and comments from Sulyma during his submissions Tuesday.
At one point, Sulyma referred to a set of issues raised by Sauvageau as “mini outrages,” which she suggested showed the employment relationship was not long for the world.
“In the end she was not prepared to resolve any of these matters of contention,” Sulyma said.
“It became cumulative. You couldn't tell her more clearly `this is enough, we've had enough of this go-around.'”
“How was she going to continue to work in this massive hierarchy … if she was at loggerheads with her superiors and indeed other departments at every turn?” Sulyma asked.
Garber maintained that Sauvageau's employers acted in “bad faith” and that she was right to take the action she did.
“Maybe Dr. Dowling thought she would come in and just accept the status quo,” he said. “But she didn't. She saw lots of things that needed to change … if they were expecting someone to just come in, sit at the desk, look good, be a wallflower, then they picked the wrong person.”