CHRISTINA HENRY v. SOUTHERN OHIO MEDICAL CENTER - Articles

All Content

CHRISTINA HENRY v. SOUTHERN OHIO MEDICAL CENTER

Posted by: Azya Thornton on Sep 11, 2025

Court: 6th Circuit Court (Published Opinions)

Attorneys 1: ARGUED: Brian C. Unger, MENDENHALL LAW GROUP, Akron, Ohio, for Appellant.

Attorneys 2: ARGUED: Benjamin Landau-Beispiel, THE KULLMAN FIRM, P.L.C., New Orleans, Louisiana, for Appellee.

Attorneys 3: ON BRIEF: Brian C. Unger, Warner Mendenhall, MENDENHALL LAW GROUP, Akron, Ohio, for Appellant.

Attorneys 4: ON BRIEF: Benjamin Landau-Beispiel, S. Mark Klyza, THE KULLMAN FIRM, P.L.C., New Orleans, Louisiana, for Appellee.

Judge(s): GRIFFIN, LARSEN, and MATHIS, Circuit Judges

Court Appealed: United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio at Cincinnati

LARSEN, Circuit Judge. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Southern Ohio Medical Center (SOMC) required its employees either to be vaccinated against the disease or to test weekly for it. Christina Henry refused both options, citing religious objections. SOMC then placed her on unpaid leave. Henry sued under Title VII for failure to accommodate her religious beliefs and for retaliation. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of SOMC, holding that Henry’s requested accommodation would place an undue hardship on SOMC and that Henry had failed to show that SOMC’s stated reasons for placing her on unpaid leave were pretextual. For the reasons below, we AFFIRM.

Attachments: