`
`3/25/2024 8:55 PM
`23CV40338
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE STATE OF OREGON
`COUNTY OF LANE
`
`
`
`WILLIAM MATTHEWS, an individual,
`
`
`
`
`
`LEGACY HEALTH, a corporation,
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`Case No. 23CV40338
`
`FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR
`DAMAGES
`(EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION)
`
`Prayer: $448,000.00
`
`NOT SUBJECT TO MANDATORY
`ARBITRATION
`
`JURY TRIAL REQUESTED
`
`
`
`
`
`COMES NOW, Plaintiff, through counsel, to respectfully file this First Amended
`
`Complaint for Damages against the above-named Defendant (herein, “Defendant” or “Legacy”).
`
`Plaintiff alleges the following:
`
`JURISDICTION, VENUE, AND PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Venue for this action is proper in Lane County. The Plaintiff worked at all times relevant
`
`to this Complaint in Lane County, Oregon. Defendant is a corporation with more than 500
`
`employees that does regular, sustained business activity in the State of Oregon and specifically in
`
`Eugene, Oregon.
`
`Page 1 –FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR
`DAMAGES
`
`
`
`Janzen Legal Services, LLC
`4550 SW Hall Blvd.
` Beaverton, Oregon 97005
`Office: 503-520-9900; Fax: 503-648-3604
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`

`

`
`
`2.
`
`Plaintiff exhausted his administrative remedies through the Oregon Bureau of Labor and
`
`Industries (BOLI) and has timely filed this Complaint. Plaintiff received a right-to-sue letter from
`
`the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission on September 25, 2023.
`3.
`Plaintiff seeks a jury trial for all claims that can be tried to a jury under state law.
`
`STATEMENT OF FACTS
`4.
`
`The COVID-19 pandemic manifested in Oregon in late February of 2020. The pandemic
`
`immediately represented a dramatic event in the lives of every Oregon resident, but particularly
`
`individuals who worked in health care facilities. Plaintiff was exposed to the harsh realities of
`
`the pandemic on a daily basis, including the risk that he may get infected with the virus. This
`
`was especially true at the start of the pandemic, when personal protective equipment (“PPE”)
`
`supplies were low, and reusing PPE was a necessity.
`
`5.
`
`Plaintiff worked for over four years without incident and with exclusively positive reviews
`
`as a Courier Driver/Laboratory Representative for Legacy at their Eugene Laboratory. At the time
`
`of his termination, Plaintiff made approximately $37,500.00 annually with a generous benefits
`
`package.
`
`6.
`
`Like so many health care workers during the pandemic, Plaintiff adjusted his life to best
`
`ensure the safety of patients and colleagues. Plaintiff worked by himself for much of the day,
`
`stopping into laboratories at medical facilities. He scrupulously followed clinic/hospital rules and
`
`regulations to protect against infection, which included wearing PPE, testing for COVID-19,
`
`Page 2 –FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR
`DAMAGES
`
`
`
`Janzen Legal Services, LLC
`4550 SW Hall Blvd.
` Beaverton, Oregon 97005
`Office: 503-520-9900; Fax: 503-648-3604
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`

`

`
`
`hand-washing and other hygiene protocols, social distancing when possible, and quarantining
`
`when necessary.
`
`7.
`
`In the summer of 2021, Plaintiff was notified that the Defendant would be implementing
`
`and enforcing a vaccine mandate in the workplace. Plaintiff was informed that those individuals
`
`with religious and/or medical conditions preventing them from taking the vaccine could apply for
`
`exemptions to the vaccine mandate.
`
`8.
`On or about September 2, 2021, Plaintiff applied for a religious exemption from the vaccine
`
`based on his sincerely held religious beliefs because he is a devout Christian. Plaintiff believes that
`
`his body is a temple of the Holy Spirit and that he is to glorify God in his body, and that taking the
`
`vaccine may harm his body, which is not what God intended. Plaintiff quoted Corinthians 6:19-
`
`20, which states “Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit within you,
`
`whom you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. So, glorify
`
`God in your body.” In addition, Plaintiff could not go against his deeply held religious beliefs by
`
`taking a vaccine that had used aborted fetal cells in the testing or manufacture of the vaccine, as
`
`he believes that abortion is murder. Plaintiff was informed his religious exception was denied.
`
`On or about October 31, 2021, Plaintiff was terminated.
`
`9.
`
`As a consequence of Legacy’s unlawful actions, Plaintiff suffered mental and emotional
`
`distress, including stress and humiliation. As a result of Legacy’s unlawful termination of Plaintiff
`
`based on his religiously based objection to taking the COVID-19 vaccine, Plaintiff lost the career
`
`that he thought he would have until he retired, his income and benefits. Plaintiff was not able to
`
`find new employment and was forced to cash out his retirement account to pay bills. He was also
`
`Page 3 –FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR
`DAMAGES
`
`
`
`Janzen Legal Services, LLC
`4550 SW Hall Blvd.
` Beaverton, Oregon 97005
`Office: 503-520-9900; Fax: 503-648-3604
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`

`

`
`
`forced into taking early retirement and will receive less monthly social security benefit as a result,
`
`which will impact him for the rest of his life. Plaintiff has incurred economic damages of at least
`
`$148,000.00 in lost wages and non-economic damages of $300,000 or in an amount to be
`
`determined at trial.
`
`10.
`
`The Defendant has yet to explain why, in its view, after more than eighteen months of
`
`being able to work without incident during the pandemic, as well as his compliance with the
`
`accommodations implemented by the Defendant, Plaintiff’s status suddenly created an
`
`unacceptable health and safety risk necessitating his termination.
`
`11.
`
`Upon information and belief, the Defendant’s adverse employment actions against
`
`Plaintiff were not to protect against an unacceptable health and safety risk. Instead, those actions
`
`were discriminatory against Plaintiff based on his sincerely held religious beliefs and retaliation
`
`for expressing those beliefs. Defendant could have continued to employ Plaintiff with the same
`
`accommodations implemented by the Defendant.
`
`12.
`
`FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`(Unlawful Employment Discrimination Based on Religion
` in Contravention of Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.030)
`
`Plaintiff realleges all paragraphs above and below as if fully set forth herein.
`
`
`
`13.
`
`Plaintiff is a member of a protected class on the basis of his devout and sincerely held
`
`
`
`
`
`religious beliefs.
`
`14.
`
`The Plaintiff’s sincerely held religious beliefs conflicted with the Defendant’s COVID-
`
`19 vaccine mandate.
`
`Page 4 –FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR
`DAMAGES
`
`
`
`Janzen Legal Services, LLC
`4550 SW Hall Blvd.
` Beaverton, Oregon 97005
`Office: 503-520-9900; Fax: 503-648-3604
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`

`

`
`
`15.
`
`When Plaintiff raised his sincere religious objection to taking the COVID-19 vaccine, the
`
`Defendant denied his requested exception to the vaccine, and then retaliated against Plaintiff for
`
`raising his religious objection to the vaccine and terminated him. It would not have been an unfair
`
`hardship for Defendant to have allowed Plaintiff to continue working with PPE, regular testing,
`
`and other measures to protect against the spread of COVID-19, as was done for the nearly two
`
`years before the imposition of the COVID-19 vaccine mandate.
`
`16.
`
`Instead of continuing to allow reasonable accommodation or set of accommodations to
`
`accommodate Plaintiff’s religious beliefs, Defendant terminated the Plaintiff. The unlawful
`
`discrimination against Plaintiff’s religion by Defendant as outlined above was a proximate cause
`
`of Plaintiff’s wrongful termination.
`
`17.
`Defendants’ violations of ORS 695A.030(1) are more specifically described as follows:
`
`1. Wrongful Termination. Defendants wrongfully terminated Plaintiff in violation of ORS
`
`695A.030 by identifying the Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees by their initial
`
`requests for religious accommodation and terminating them after they invoked their rights
`
`under ORS 695A.030, in their requests for religious exemptions from the vaccine
`
`mandates. Defendants, by thus identifying each individual disfavored employee with
`
`sincere religious objection, and separating them as a group to be terminated, violated
`
`695A.030 anti-discrimination prohibition on the basis of both disparate treatment and
`
`disparate impact.
`
`2. Wrongful reduction in pay. Defendants wrongfully reduced the Plaintiff’s pay under Title
`
`VII and ORS 695A.030(1)(b) in a discriminatory manner on the basis of his religion by
`
`terminating him after he submitted his religious exemption.
`
`Page 5 –FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR
`DAMAGES
`
`
`
`Janzen Legal Services, LLC
`4550 SW Hall Blvd.
` Beaverton, Oregon 97005
`Office: 503-520-9900; Fax: 503-648-3604
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`

`

`
`
`3. Retaliation. Defendants violated retaliation provisions of ORS 695A.030 by segregating
`
`and terminating Plaintiff and other similarly situated individuals who invoked ORS
`
`695A.030 protections in their initial requests for religious exemptions, and then terminating
`
`them for that invocation of their rights under ORS 695A.030. Defendants, by thus
`
`identifying each individual disfavored employee with sincere religious objection, and
`
`separating all as a group for retaliation, violated Title VII's anti-discrimination prohibition
`
`on the basis of both disparate treatment and disparate impact.
`
`4. Failure to provide reasonable accommodation. Defendants failed to engage in an
`
`interactive process to reasonably accommodate Plaintiff’s request for a religious exemption
`
`in violation of ORS 695A.030. Even though Defendants could have simply and safely
`
`permitted Plaintiff to continue working under a religious exemption with an N95 mask,
`
`weekly testing, or another accommodation, Defendants summarily terminated Plaintiff and
`
`other similarly situated employees who filed religious exemptions, regardless of the nature
`
`of their position and the level of risk they may have posed.
`
`5. Company-wide, or systemic, discriminatory pattern or practice in violation of ORS
`
`695A.030. Defendants engaged in a companywide discriminatory pattern or practice by
`
`wrongfully terminating Plaintiff and other employees seeking religious exemptions from
`
`the COVID-19 vaccine mandate, regardless of the nature of their degree in involvement
`
`with patient care and without making any attempt to reasonably accommodate their
`
`religious practices so that they could continue in the healthcare field. Defendants, along
`
`with other regional employers, engaged in a discriminatory pattern and practice of
`
`excluding religious employees from their facilities resulting in a massive statewide
`
`reduction in the amount of religious workers in Oregon’s healthcare industry and leading
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`Page 6 –FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR
`DAMAGES
`
`
`
`Janzen Legal Services, LLC
`4550 SW Hall Blvd.
` Beaverton, Oregon 97005
`Office: 503-520-9900; Fax: 503-648-3604
`
`

`

`
`
`to a widespread adverse result that many religious healthcare workers could not find
`
`employment in their field within Oregon. Defendants’ staff and employees created a hostile
`
`work environment for Plaintiff and other employees who had religious exemptions to the
`
`vaccine mandate by making threatening and hostile statements which made Plaintiff feel
`
`intimidated, harassed, and humiliated on account of his sincere religious beliefs in
`
`opposition to the COVID-19 vaccine. The humiliation and intimidation on account of
`
`Plaintiff’s religious beliefs caused severe emotional distress.
`
`18.
`
`As a result of Defendant’s violation of O.R.S. 659A.030(1)(A), Plaintiff has been damaged
`
`in an amount of at least $148,000 in economic damages, and for $300,000 in non-economic
`
`damages or in an amount to be determined at trial for suffering, emotional distress, anguish, and
`
`mental distress. Plaintiff also seeks punitive damages and attorney’s fees.
`
`19.
`
`SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`(Unlawful Discrimination in Contravention of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act –
`42 U.S.C. §2000e et seq.)
`
`Plaintiff realleges all paragraphs above and below as if fully set forth herein.
`
`20.
`
`Plaintiff is a member of a protected class on the basis of his devout and sincerely held
`
`religious belief in the tenants of Christianity.
`
`21.
`
`The Plaintiff’s sincerely held religious beliefs conflicted with the Defendant’s COVID-19
`
`vaccine mandate.
`
`22.
`
`When Plaintiff requested religious exceptions to the Defendant’s COVID-19 vaccine
`
`mandate, the Defendant failed to make a good faith effort to recognize and accommodate
`
`Page 7 –FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR
`DAMAGES
`
`
`
`Janzen Legal Services, LLC
`4550 SW Hall Blvd.
` Beaverton, Oregon 97005
`Office: 503-520-9900; Fax: 503-648-3604
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`

`

`
`
`Plaintiff’s religious beliefs.
`
`23.
`
`Instead of finding reasonable accommodation or set of accommodations for his religious
`
`beliefs, the Defendant engaged in a series of adverse employment actions culminating in
`
`Plaintiff’s unlawful effective terminations. The unlawful discrimination against Plaintiff’s
`
`religious beliefs by Defendant as outlined above was a proximate cause of Plaintiff’s wrongful
`
`termination.
`
`24.
`Defendants’ violations of Title VII are more specifically described as follows:
`
`1. Wrongful Termination. Defendant wrongfully terminated Plaintiff in violation of Title VII
`
`of the United States Civil Rights Act by identifying the Plaintiff and other similarly situated
`
`employees by their initial requests for religious accommodation and terminating them after
`
`they invoked their rights under Title VII in their requests for religious exemptions from the
`
`vaccine mandates. Defendants, by thus identifying each individual disfavored employee
`
`with sincere religious objection, and separating all as a group to be terminated, violated
`
`Title VII's anti-discrimination prohibition on the basis of both disparate treatment and
`
`disparate impact.
`
`2. Wrongful reduction in pay. Defendants wrongfully reduced Plaintiff’s pay under Title VII
`
`in a discriminatory manner on the basis of his religion by terminating him after he
`
`submitted a religious exemption.
`
`3. Retaliation. Defendant violated retaliation provisions of Title VII by segregating and
`
`terminating the Plaintiff and other similarly situated individuals who invoked Title VII’s
`
`protections in their initial requests for religious exemptions, and then terminating them for
`
`that invocation of their rights under Title VII. Defendants, by thus identifying each
`
`Page 8 –FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR
`DAMAGES
`
`
`
`Janzen Legal Services, LLC
`4550 SW Hall Blvd.
` Beaverton, Oregon 97005
`Office: 503-520-9900; Fax: 503-648-3604
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`

`

`
`
`individual disfavored employee with sincere religious objection, and separating all as a
`
`group for retaliation, violated Title VII's anti-discrimination prohibition on the basis of
`
`both disparate treatment and disparate impact.
`
`4. Failure to provide reasonable accommodation. Defendants failed to engage in an
`
`interactive process to reasonably accommodate the Plaintiff’s request for a religious
`
`exemption in violation of Title VII and the corresponding provisions of Oregon law. Even
`
`though Defendants could have simply and safely permitted the Plaintiff to continue
`
`working under a religious exemption with an N95 mask, weekly testing, remote work, or
`
`another accommodation, Defendant summarily terminated Plaintiff and other similarly
`
`situated employees who filed religious exemptions, regardless of the nature of their
`
`position and the level of risk they may have posed.
`
`5. Company-wide, or systemic, discriminatory pattern or practice in violation of Title VII of
`
`the Civil Rights Act. Defendants engaged in a companywide discriminatory pattern or
`
`practice by terminating Plaintiff and other employees seeking religious exemptions from
`
`the COVID-19 vaccine mandate, regardless of the nature of their degree in involvement
`
`with patient care and without making any attempt to reasonably accommodate their
`
`religious practices so that they could continue in the healthcare field. Defendants, along
`
`with other regional employers, engaged in a discriminatory pattern and practice of
`
`excluding religious employees from their facilities resulting in a massive statewide
`
`reduction in the number of religious workers in Oregon’s healthcare industry, and leading
`
`to a widespread adverse result that many religious healthcare workers could not find
`
`employment in their field within Oregon. Defendants’ staff and employees created a hostile
`
`work environment for Plaintiff who had requested a religious exemption to the vaccine
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`Page 9 –FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR
`DAMAGES
`
`
`
`Janzen Legal Services, LLC
`4550 SW Hall Blvd.
` Beaverton, Oregon 97005
`Office: 503-520-9900; Fax: 503-648-3604
`
`

`

`
`
`mandate, by making threatening and hostile statements which made the claimant feel
`
`intimidated, harassed, and humiliated on account of his sincere religious beliefs in
`
`opposition to the COVID-19 vaccine. The humiliation and intimidation on account of the
`
`Plaintiff’s religious beliefs caused severe emotional distress.
`
`25.
`
`As a result of Defendant’s unlawful discrimination, Plaintiff has been damaged in an
`
`amount of at least $148,000 in economic damages, and for $300,000 in non-economic damages
`
`or in an amount to be determined at trial for suffering, emotional distress, anguish, and mental
`
`distress. Plaintiffs also seek punitive damages and attorney’s fees.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant and seeks the following
`
`relief:
`
`1. A judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant in an amount to be determined at
`
`trial.
`
`2. Plaintiff seeks a trial by jury on all claims to which she is entitled to a jury trial.
`
`3. Plaintiff’s reasonable attorney fees, costs, and prevailing party fees.
`
`4. Any other relief as the Court deems just and equitable.
`
`DATED this 25th day of March, 2024.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`JANZEN LEGAL SERVICES, LLC
`
`By /s/ Caroline Janzen
`Caroline Janzen, OSB No. 176233
`caroline@ruggedlaw.com
`Attorney for the Plaintiffs
`
`
`Page 10 –FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR
`DAMAGES
`
`Janzen Legal Services, LLC
`4550 SW Hall Blvd.
` Beaverton, Oregon 97005
`Office: 503-520-9900; Fax: 503-648-3604
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`

`

`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on the date set forth below, I served the foregoing FIRST
`
`AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES, on the party(ies) listed below:
`
`
`
`
`
`Brenda K. Baumgart
`Brenda.baumgart@stoel.com
`Melissa J. Healy
`Melissa.healy@stoel.com
`Matthew A. Tellam
`Matt.tellam@stoel.com
`STOEL RIVES, LLP
`760 SW Ninth Avenue, Suite 3000
`Portland, OR 97205
`
`Attorneys for Defendant
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By the following indicated method(s):
`
`
`
` ☐
`
`
`
` ☒
`
`
`
` ☒
`
`by mailing full, true, and correct copies thereof in sealed a first-class postage
`prepaid envelope addressed to the party(ies) at the address set forth above and
`deposited with the United States Postal Service on the date set forth below.
`
`by electronically mailing full, true, and correct copies at the attorney(s) set forth
`above on the date set forth below.
`
`eService via Odyssey File & Serve
`
`
`
`
`DATED this 25th day of March, 2024.
`
`JANZEN LEGAL SERVICES, LLC
`
`By: /s/ Caroline Janzen
`
`
`
`Caroline Janzen, OSB# 176233
`
`caroline@ruggedlaw.com
`
`(503) 520-9900
`
`Attorney for Plaintiff
`
`Page 11 –FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR
`DAMAGES
`
`Janzen Legal Services, LLC
`4550 SW Hall Blvd.
` Beaverton, Oregon 97005
`Office: 503-520-9900; Fax: 503-648-3604
`
`