4th Circuit Reverses Trial Judge’s Dismissal, Revives Religious Accommodation Suit against Inova Health after BLG Oral Argument
In a unanimous opinion published Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled the trial judge erred in dismissing a religious accommodation suit against Inova Health. Following oral argument by Bosson Legal Group’s attorneys, the Fourth Circuit ruled all three counts of the civil rights lawsuit should move forward against Inova. The opinion should signal a change in tides for the hospital chain, which is facing numerous other civil rights lawsuits on similar grounds.
In a statement, Bosson Legal Group attorney, and lead counsel in the appeal, Timothy Bosson noted: “We’re thrilled the Fourth Circuit overturned the district court’s clear error and joined its sister circuits in affirming the broad protections all religious Americans enjoy. Our client’s claims were more than sufficient to survive a motion to dismiss and we look forward to ensuring employers that violate federal civil rights law are held accountable.”
“...[A]t this stage, the district court erred in dismissing her claims. ...[A]ll three of Barnett’s claims should have survived a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss. ”
Bosson Legal Group’s client, Ms. Barnett, is a former pediatric nurse and alleges Inova Health forced her to choose between her employment and religious beliefs in violation of federal civil rights law. The district court had initially dismissed Ms. Barnett’s lawsuit, finding she had failed to state sufficient claims. The district judge claimed Ms. Barnett’s beliefs that God had instructed her not to take the COVID-19 vaccination were not religious in nature. Moreover, the district court ruled Ms. Barnett’s claims for disparate treatment under both Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the Virginia Human Rights Act were duplicative.
The Fourth Circuit said the trial judge wrongly applied federal civil rights doctrines and that “all three of Barnett’s claims should have survived a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss.” “Barnett has sufficiently alleged she is a sincere follower of the Christian faith at this stage,” wrote Judge Gregory. The Fourth Circuit further rejected the district court’s argument that Ms. Barnett’s disparate treatment claims were duplicative, noting a Plaintiff may plead multiple or alternative claims based on the same facts. The judges added that “Barnett has sufficiently alleged facts supporting a reasonable inference of discriminatory intent at this stage.”
In the oral argument, BLG’s principal Timothy Bosson was joined by counsel from the Virginia Attorney General’s office, who argued a portion of the appeal. During oral argument, the Fourth Circuit judges seemed favorable to arguments advanced by Ms. Barnett’s counsel, while scrutinizing those advanced by Inova. In June, the Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares, ex-EEOC officials, and non-profit legal advocacy group Alliance Defending Freedom each filed amicus curae briefs in support of the appeal.
Following the Fourth Circuit’s ruling, Ms. Barnett’s lawsuit will move forward again in the U.S. District Court.
Attorneys Timothy Bosson, Robert Rose, and Isaiah Kalinowski represent the Plaintiff.
Referencing Kristen Barnett v. Inova Health Care Services, case number 24-1271, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.