[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-502837-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-502837-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","ascension-st-vincent-lawsuit-1-class-action-complaint-for-damages-and-demand-for-jury-trial","Ascension-St.-Vincent-lawsuit-1 - Class Action Complaint for Damages and Demand for Jury Trial","","Class action complaint filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division, in Case 1:22-cv-01097-TWP-DML. Plaintiffs allege Ascension Health, along with related St. Vincent entities, implemented a COVID-19 vaccine mandate while failing to comply with Title VII’s requirements for religious accommodations. The complaint asserts a coercive exemption review process that did not individually assess requests, delayed and denied approvals to limit alternatives, and led to suspensions and effective termination timelines for employees who remained unvaccinated.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/ascension-st-vincent-lawsuit-1-class-action-complaint-for-damages-and-demand-for-jury-trial/502837/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/ascension-st-vincent-lawsuit-1-class-action-complaint-for-damages-and-demand-for-jury-trial/502837.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Guten tag","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-20","2026-10-03",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",10,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What legal basis do the plaintiffs cite in the complaint?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"The complaint states it is brought as a class action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to remedy a pattern of religious discrimination.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"What policy does the complaint challenge?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"It challenges Ascension Health’s COVID-19 vaccination mandate for employees and affiliated employees.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"How do plaintiffs describe the religious exemption process?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Plaintiffs allege the process did not properly assess each application, involved delays, and denied exemptions within time frames that left applicants little time to consider alternatives.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},502837,1791261175,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,111,115,120,123,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":112,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":113,"slug":114},8,30,"research-report",{"id":116,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":117,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":119},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":118,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":121,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":122},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":55,"slug":125},"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":112,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145},687212321768,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/a0010bdbe886d2fe77?x-image-process=image/resize,m_fixed,w_180,h_180&k=1789897067658708522","Case 1:22-cv-01097-TWP-DML Document 1 Filed 05/27/22 Page 1 of 208 PageID \\#: 1  \nIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT  \nFOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA  \nINDIANAPOLIS DIVISION  \nKAYLYN APPLEGATE, ROBIN BANKS, KRISTINA BARGA, CINDY BISHOP, DONNA JO BOWLES, JOSIE BROWN, DONNA BRYANT, MOLLY BUEHLER, ROBIN BURNS, SAMANTHA CASSIDY, ROBERT CLEMENTS, JENNIFER COLLINS, RHONDA DAVIS, CHAD DENNEY, PATRICIA DRONEMCCULLOUGH, ERIKA FOWLER, PATRICK FOWLER, DR. JOSHUA FREDERICK, RICHARD FULKERSON, MARZENA GASLAWSKI, DONNA GRANT, TRACEY HARBAUGH, BRENDA HARTMAN, KAREN HERSH, GARY HIGGINBOTHAM, MATT HORNE, SARAH HORNER, BRANDY KEHRT, HEATHER KING, MADISON KUHN, MICHELLE LANDIS, CECILIA LESCH, TERESA LESCH, JENNIFER MAUPIN, JOSHUA MILLER, TIFFANY MILLER, BETHANY MONTE, MONICA NALLEY, STEVEN OHLHEISER, SUSANA OSBORNE, CHRIS PARR, JEMAEL PARTLOW, AMANDA PISANO, ASHLEY PLOUGHE, BARBARA PLUHAR, MONICA POOLE, LEISA RANDALL, TERESA RIDLEN, BONNIE RIPBERGER, ROCHELLE ROTT, ROBERT RUNGE, TINA SNEED, DANIELLA STAFFORD, LISA STULTS, KERI STULTZ, DELLA TAYLOR, AMANDA THIERGARTNER, MILICA VRANIC, LISA WEBB, ALAYNAH WEISEND, VICTORIA WILLOUR, JODI WOLFENBARGER, ANDREW ZENTHOFER, AND JUSTONZENTHOFER on behalf of Themselves and all those similarly situated,  \nPlaintiffs,  \nCause No. 1:22-cv-1097  \nCase 1:22-cv-01097-TWP-DML Document 1 Filed 05/27/22 Page 2 of 208 PageID \\#: 2  \nvs.  \nST. VINCENT HEALTH, INC.,  \nST. JOSEPH HOSPITAL & HEALTH CENTER, INC., ST. MARY’S HEALTH, INC., ST. MARY’S MEDICAL GROUP, LLC, ST. MARY’S WARRICK HOSPITAL, INC., ST. VINCENT ANDERSON REGIONAL HOSPITAL, INC.,  \nST. VINCENT CARMEL HOSPITAL, INC., ST. VINCENT DUNN HOSPITAL, INC., ST. VINCENT FISHERS HOSPITAL, INC., ST. VINCENT HEART CENTER OF INDIANA, LLC, ST. VINCENT HOSPITAL AND HEALTH CARE CENTER, INC.,  \nST. VINCENT HOSPITAL AND HEALTHCARE CENTER, INC. D/B/AWILLIAM K. NASSER, MD, HEALTHCARE EDUCATION AND SIMULATION CENTER, ST. VINCENT HOSPITAL AND HEALTH CARE CENTER, INC. D/B/A ASCENSION HEALTH ST. VINCENT STRESS CENTER, ST. VINCENT HOSPITAL AND HEALTH CARE CENTER, INC. D/B/A ASCENSION HEALTH ST. VINCENT WOMEN’S  \nHEALTH BOUTIQUE, ST. VINCENT MEDICAL GROUP, INC., ST. VINCENT SETON SPECIALTY HOSPITAL, INC., ST. VINCENT WILLIAMSPORT HOSPITAL, INC., ASCENSION HEALTH, INC., ASCENSION HEALTH-IS, INC., ASCENSION HEALTH MINISTRY SERVICE CENTER, LLC; AND MEDXCEL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT, LLC.  \nDefendants.  \nCLASS ACTION COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND  \nDEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 1  \n1 As this is a related case, Plaintiffs are utilizing many of the same Exhibits previously submitted in Paul Halczenko, et al. v. Ascension Health, Inc., and St. Vincent Hospital and  \nCase 1:22-cv-01097-TWP-DML Document 1 Filed 05/27/22 Page 3 of 208 PageID \\#: 3  \n“Title VII does not contemplate asking employees to sacrifice their jobs to observe  \ntheir religious practices.”  \nAdeyeye v. Heartland Sweeteners, LLC, 721 F. 3d 444, 456 (7th Cir. 2013)  \nINTRODUCTION  \n1. This is a class action brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,(Pub. L. 88-352), codified at 42 U. S. C. § 2000e et seq. (“Title VII”) to remedy a pattern of religious discrimination by the nation’s second largest hospital operator, Ascension Health, Inc. (“Ascension Health”) against employees who requested religious accommodations from Ascension Health’s mandate that its employees and the employees of Ascension Health’s affiliates receive the COVID-19 vaccine.  \n2. Like many hospital operators, Ascension Health announced in July 2021 that it intended to implement a COVID-19 vaccination mandate for its employees.  \n3. Unlike other hospital operators, however, and contrary to its obligations under Title VII, Ascension Health established a religious exemption  \nHealth Care Center, Inc., d/b/a Ascension Health St. Vincent Hospital, Cause No. 1:21-cv- 2816-JPH-MG, specifically those exhibits identified in the Appendix of Exhibits [Dkt. 9 at 2-8], Supplemental Appendix of Exhibits [Dkt. 38 at 1-3], and the Second Supplemental Appendix of","cbCaigTmDD9QsYcI","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaigTmDD9QsYcI","pdf",1716484,208,"English","# Introduction\n## Class action under Title VII\n## COVID-19 vaccination mandate\n## Alleged flaws in religious exemption review\n## Coercive process and denial timelines","[{\"question\":\"What legal basis do the plaintiffs cite in the complaint?\",\"answer\":\"The complaint states it is brought as a class action under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to remedy a pattern of religious discrimination.\"},{\"question\":\"What policy does the complaint challenge?\",\"answer\":\"It challenges Ascension Health’s COVID-19 vaccination mandate for employees and affiliated employees.\"},{\"question\":\"How do plaintiffs describe the religious exemption process?\",\"answer\":\"Plaintiffs allege the process did not properly assess each application, involved delays, and denied exemptions within time frames that left applicants little time to consider alternatives.\"}]","Ascension-St.-Vincent-lawsuit-1 - Class Action Complaint for Damages and Demand for Jury Trial | PDF",1791044356,524]