Stepp v. Employment Security Division Review Board
Indiana Court of Appeals
521 N.E.2d 350 (1988)
- Written by Jenny Perry, JD
Facts
Dorothe Stepp (plaintiff) was discharged by the Medical Laboratory of Indianapolis, Indiana (laboratory) because she refused to perform testing on vials of bodily fluids that bore AIDS warning labels. The laboratory provided employees with safety gear and a manual that included guidelines recommended by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) for working with potentially infectious specimens. There was no policy specific to AIDS specimens, but the topic was discussed in training sessions and meetings. Stepp and her supervisor also discussed safety precautions, but when asked to perform tests on a specimen marked with the warning label, Stepp refused. Stepp was advised that refusing to perform a test on any specimen she was assigned would be considered insubordination and would subject her to discipline, including dismissal. Stepp refused to test a second vial and was suspended for three days in accordance with the laboratory’s discipline policy. Stepp told her supervisors that her concern was not safety but rather a belief that performing the tests was against God’s will because AIDS was God’s plague on man. After returning from the suspension, Stepp again refused to work with a specimen bearing an AIDS warning label and was discharged. At an unemployment-benefits hearing before the Employment Security Division Review Board (board) (defendant), Stepp testified that she had heard of workers contracting AIDS from contaminated fluids, but Stepp did not present evidence that the laboratory’s precautions were insufficient to prevent spread of the disease. The board found that the laboratory dismissed Stepp for just cause and denied Stepp’s application for benefits. Stepp appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Conover, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.