POCATELLO — A former Idaho State University student is suing the school, claiming she was discriminated against and excluded from its Doctor of Pharmacy program because of her race.

According to court documents, ISU permitted the “discriminatory and retaliatory exclusion of Chanica Sintima from ISU's Doctor of Pharmacy program based on her race and protected activities under Title VI, the Idaho Human Rights Act, and the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.” ”

Chanica Sintima is suing the ISU and its employees Dr. Erin Berry and Dr. Kasidy McKay for retaliation and negligent infliction of emotional distress.

According to court documents, Sintima was among the few black students enrolled at ISU.

According to the lawsuit, “only 38% of doctoral pharmacy students (at ISU) are female and only 2.14% of students are Black or African American.”

According to court documents, Sintima achieved “significant academic success, including multiple Dean's List recognitions and a cumulative grade point average of 3.62.”

Sintima's name appears on the ISU College of Pharmacy dean's list for 2021 and 2022.

allegations

Sintima attended ISU's Advanced Pharmacy Practice Experience (APPE) courses, which required her to complete six-week supervised clinical rotations.

By summer 2023, Sintima had reportedly completed most of her required clinical rotations and received all “A” grades.

On September 18, 2023, Sintima began her final clinical rotation under the supervision of Dr. Berry, a Caucasian woman.

Sintima says she experienced “differences in Dr.’s treatment” compared to another Caucasian student. Berry opposite her” observed.

The allegations include “inconsistent and varying application of Berry’s attendance and tardiness policies, as well as differential use of course resources.”

Per ISU policy, Berry must give students a “moderate” performance evaluation in the third week of 6-week rotations to provide them with feedback on their work.

Berry reportedly submitted Sintima's interim evaluations late, while other students received their evaluations weeks early.

On October 5, 2023, Sintima brought this up to Berry and later emailed ISU's Associate Director of Equity and Inclusion about the issue.

Court documents say Sintima also believes she was held to a different standard than other students when it came to Berry's attendance policies, even after she told Berry she was having trouble finding transportation to class.

Sintima reportedly noted that Berry “did not punish her Caucasian classmate's tardiness and/or absences in the same way that she criticized her.”

The lawsuit states: “The only difference visible to Ms. Sintima is the students’ respective race and color.”

Sintima eventually confronted Berry and reportedly told her that she planned to file a protected discrimination complaint with the Office of Experiential Education.

The lawsuit alleges that Berry threatened Sintima about it and said she would tell her department head, Dr. Report Kasidy McKay.

Sintima continued to contact Berry about her interim evaluation. Berry reportedly texted Sintima at 10:34 p.m. on October 16, 2023 that her review had been submitted online.

That same day, Sintima contacted ISU's Office of Equity and Inclusion and stated:

“I just had a conversation with my teacher and told her that she was treating me unfairly in relation to discrimination. I previously emailed you to file a discrimination complaint, but I have not heard from you. Please tell me what should I do? I'm very nervous when she reports me to Kassidy (sic). I'm a little nervous about retaliation at the moment since my teacher face was pink. I’m not sure what’s going to happen to me.”

Sintima also documented her concerns to the EIRMC clinic where she completed her clinical rotations and reportedly contacted Dr. Kenneth Monroe, president of the Pocatello chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (“NAACP”).

The lawsuit alleges that Berry was contacted by a colleague at EIRMC and told her that Sintima was “extremely upset” and had sought emotional support from an EIRMC colleague regarding the dispute.

The documents allege that Berry passed this information to McKay.

On October 17, 2023, McKay contacted Sintima and informed her that she was being referred to the Office of Experiential Education (OEE) because she received a “B” in the areas of “Confidence and Professionalism.”

Sintima claims that other Caucasian students also received “2” points in professionalism but “were not referred to OEE for mentoring or advice.”

McKay reportedly asked Sintima to meet with her during her EIRMC rotation, but Sintima was unavailable due to her work schedule, transportation difficulties, and fear of being reprimanded due to Berry's attendance policies.

Over the next two days, Sintima and McKay tried to arrange a time to meet, but they were unsuccessful.

The lawsuit states: “Dr. In retaliation, McKay prohibited Ms. Sintima from reporting to EIRMC to complete her rotation until Ms. Sintima attended a meeting with Dr. McKay agreed. Ms. Sintima was extremely upset when Dr. McKay continued to schedule meetings at times when Ms. Sintima was due to report to the EIRMC – which enabled her to challenge Dr. to violate the attendance obligations communicated and imposed on her. Berry.”

The lawsuit alleges that McKay called Sintima on October 19, 2023 to inform her that she would report her to the “Progressions Committee (ISU's oversight disciplinary committee) to seek disciplinary action or dismissal from the ISU pharmacy program.”

Sintima says she “composed herself emotionally and sent an email to Dr. at around 12:07 p.m. “Sent McKay to arrange a Zoom meeting for either 1:00-2:00 p.m. or 4:30-5:00 p.m. that day to defuse their previous disagreement.”

McKay reportedly denied Sintima's request for a meeting and reiterated that she would be referring her from the program for disciplinary action and/or dismissal.

That evening, Sintima said she had completed a homework assignment for Berry, and the attached email said, “Have a nice weekend and see you Monday.”

The lawsuit alleges that Berry and McKay viewed the statement as a threat and misinterpreted Sintima's email as an “insubordinate threat to appear for her clinical rotation at EIRMC against their orders.”

McKay and Berry then contacted EIRMC's pharmacy director and chief of security on October 20, 2023 to report Sintima as a threat to hospital security.

Sintima alleges that Berry represented to EIRMC that she was “insubordinate and falsely represented to EIRMC that Ms. Sintima was planning to hide at the hospital and was conspiring to disclose protected HIPAA patient information to members of the media.”

Berry reportedly told others that Sintima would “jeopardize patient safety and the ISU/EIRMC relationship,” the lawsuit says.

The lawsuit then states that EIRMC ordered a “BOLO,” or “Be On The Lookout,” with its security team and denied her access to the property.

Sintima claims she suffered “significant embarrassment, humiliation and emotional distress” and that Berry and McKay’s conduct “further irreparably damaged Ms. Sintima’s reputation in her community and her professional reputation in the medical industry.”

Follow-up meeting

That same day, Sintima reportedly planned to meet Dr. Kenneth Monroe of the NAACP to travel to Pocatello to meet with McKay. According to court documents, Sintima sent McKay an email at 3 p.m. confirming she was present for a meeting at her office, but McKay never showed up.

Sintima emailed McKay twice again on Oct. 23 requesting a meeting. McKay declined the request for a meeting, reportedly replying, “I will make an appointment to meet with Dean Wadsworth and then get back to you.”

On October 27, Sintima again requested a meeting with McKay via email and filed a formal complaint with ISU's Title IX and Title VI Coordinator Ian Parker, alleging “racial discrimination and retaliation.” of Ms. Sintima's expulsion from the ISU.” APPE course.”

McKay reportedly refused to meet with Sintima again on October 30, instead telling her that all correspondence would be “handled” by the Progress Committee.

Although Sintima reportedly received a “B” midway through and completed most weeks of her six-week rotation at ERIMC, Berry gave her a “No Pass” and she failed the course.

On January 26, Sintima met with the ISU Progress Committee and “described her concerns about racial discrimination and retaliation.”

On February 2, the committee voted to remove Sintima from the Doctor of Pharmacy program. Sintima appealed the decision, which was rejected on March 28. Sintima filed a second appeal, which was rejected by the ISU in a “final decision” on June 3.

Sintima is now seeking financial compensation for lost income, lost earning capacity, tuition and student loan interest, and readmission to Idaho State University's Doctor of Pharmacy program to receive credit and transfer to another academic institution.

Testify

EastIdahoNews.com reached out to Sintima's attorneys at Hepworth Law Firm, who responded that they were “unable to comment substantively on the ongoing litigation beyond the pleadings set forth in the complaint.” Procedurally, the lawsuit was filed and we are waiting for ISU and the defendants to hire counsel and appear in the lawsuit.”

We also reached out to Idaho State University, which reached out to a representative from Quarles & Brady, LLP for comment, and they provided the following statement:

“The university takes the allegations raised in this complaint very seriously. When the University was first made aware of these allegations, the University immediately hired an outside law firm to conduct a thorough, independent investigation. This investigation determined that the facts do not support these allegations and the University will vigorously defend them in litigation.”

Further court hearings are not yet scheduled and the ISU has not yet filed a legal response to the allegations.

Although this lawsuit has been filed, it does not mean that the claims are true.