Randy Reed Automotive, Inc. et al v. Sebelius et al

Filing 29

ORDER granting Injunction. Signed on 11/12/14 by District Judge Ortrie D. Smith. (Matthes, Renea)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
ST. JOSEPH DIVISION
RANDY REED AUTOMOTIVE, INC.,
et al.,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
SYLVIA BURWELL, et al,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 13-6117-CV-SJ-ODS

ORDER
In light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc.,
134 S. Ct. 2751 (2014), and upon consideration of the parties’ motions, it is hereby:
ORDERED that Defendants, their employees, agents, officers 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 Plaintiffs
Randy Reed Automotive, Inc.; Randy Reed Buick-GMC, Inc.; Randy Reed
Nissan, LLC; and Randy Reed Chevrolet, LLC (“Randy Reed Companies”)
to provide their employees with health coverage for contraceptive
methods, sterilization procedures, and related patient education and
counseling to which Plaintiffs object on religious grounds, e.g., 26 C.F.R. §
54.9815-2713(a)(1)(iv); 29 C.F.R. § 2590.715-2713(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 Plaintiffs Randy Reed Companies, their employee health plan(s), the group
health coverage provided in connection with such plan(s), and/or the Randy Reed
Companies’ health insurance issuers and/or third-party administrators with respect to
the Randy Reed Companies’ health plan(s); and it is further
ORDERED that judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants
on Plaintiffs’ claim under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000bb
et seq.; and it is further
ORDERED that all other claims against Defendants are DISMISSED; and it is
further
ORDERED that any motion by Plaintiffs for attorneys’ fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
§ 1988(b) may be filed within 45 days after entry of judgment and Defendants shall have
30 days in which to respond to Plaintiffs’ motion; 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.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s/ Ortrie D. Smith
ORTRIE D. SMITH, SENIOR JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DATE: November 12, 2014

2