Weingartz Supply Company et al v. Sebelius et al
Filing
98
INJUNCTION AND JUDGMENT in favor of Plaintiffs Weingartz Supply Company and Daniel Weingartz on the claim under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, against Defendants; DISMISSING all other claims against Defendants and Directing Parties to submit a joint status report no later than 2/9/2015. (see order for details) Signed by District Judge Robert H. Cleland. (LWag)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
LEGATUS, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
Case No. 12-12061
SYLVIA BURWELL, et al.,
Defendants.
___________________________________/
INJUNCTION AND JUDGMENT AS TO PLAINTIFFS WEINGARTZ SUPPLY
COMPANY AND DANIEL WEINGARTZ1
In light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.,
134 S. Ct. 2751 (2014), and defendants’ consent, it is hereby
ORDERED that defendants, their employees, agents, and successors in office
are enjoined
(a) from enforcing
(1) the “June 30, 2014 Contraceptive Coverage Requirement,” defined here to
include those provisions of federal law in existence on June 30, 2014,
when the Supreme Court decided Hobby Lobby, that require Plaintiff
Weingartz Supply Company to provide its employees with health coverage
for contraceptive methods, sterilization procedures, and related patient
education and counseling to which plaintiffs object on religious grounds,
1
This Injunction and Judgment relates to Plaintiffs Weingartz Supply Company’s
and Daniel Weingartz’s claims only and does not affect Plaintiff Legatus’ claims in
any way.
e.g., 26 C.F.R. § 54.9815-2713(a)(1)(iv); 29 C.F.R. § 2590.7152713(a)(1)(iv); 45 C.F.R. § 147.130(a)(1)(iv); and
(2) any penalties, fines, or assessments for noncompliance with the June 30,
2014 Contraceptive Coverage Requirement, including those found in 26
U.S.C. § 4980D, and 29 U.S.C. §§ 1132 and 1185d; and
(b) from taking any other actions based on noncompliance with the June 30,
2014 Contraceptive Coverage Requirement
against Plaintiff Weingartz Supply Company, its employee health plan(s), the group
health coverage provided in connection with such plan(s), and/or Weingartz Supply
Company’s health insurance issuers and/or third-party administrators with respect to
Weingartz Supply Company’s health plan(s); and it is further
ORDERED that judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiffs Weingartz Supply
Company and Daniel Weingartz and against defendants on Plaintiffs Weingartz Supply
Company and Daniel Weingartz’s claim under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act,
42 U.S.C. §§ 2000bb et seq.; and it is further
ORDERED that all other claims brought by Plaintiffs Weingartz Supply Company
and Daniel Weingartz against Defendants are DISMISSED; and it is further
ORDERED that the Parties will meet and confer to reach agreement on
attorneys’ fees and costs with respect to Plaintiffs Weingartz Supply Company and
Daniel Weingartz’s claims.
The Parties will file a joint status report, including a
recommendation for further proceedings, by no later than February 9, 2015. If there is
no resolution of the attorneys’ fees and costs matter, Plaintiffs Weingartz Supply
Company and Daniel Weingartz may file a motion for attorneys’ fees and costs within
2
thirty days of February 9, 2015, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54; and it is
further
ORDERED that this Injunction and Judgment does not apply with respect to any
changes in statute or regulation that are enacted or promulgated after this date, and
nothing herein prevents plaintiffs from filing a new civil action to challenge any such
future changes.
_s/Robert H. Cleland_____________________
ROBERT H. CLELAND
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: December 31, 2014
I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record
on this date, December 31, 2014, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.
_s/Lisa Wagner_________________________
Case Manager and Deputy Clerk
(313) 234-5522
S:\Cleland\JUDGE'S DESK\C1 ORDERS\12-12061.LEGATUS.InjunctionandJudgment.stip.wpd
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?