Id. Therefore, this function was “essential to achievement of the Commonwealth’s goal... of training and maintaining a pool of specialists skilled in a particular discipline.” Id. at 213. In the present case, there are three registered nurses and a respiratory therapist at issue. Their primary function is to give proper care and treatment to the patients who are admitted to the nursing home. They are not involved in any type of professional state-sponsored research program as the doctor was in Gargiulo, 239 Va. 209. They are not students or interns trying to pursue further training. They are not primarily engaged in teaching nor is their primary function to perform administrative type work for the state as in Benjamin v. University Internal Medicine Foundation, 254 Va. 400 (1997) (<HOLDING>). Taking into consideration the four factors
recognizing similar duties holding that one claim was not preempted because it did not allege the violation of duties created by any welfare plan but a violation of duties as a past employer holding that the medical director of the episode care clinic was primarily engaged in administrative duties and was not performing the duties of an attending physician and was therefore entitled to immunity holding officers engaged in search entitled to immunity holding that the amount of time devoted to managerial duties and the significance of those duties present factual questions