Booth v. New York Presbyterian Hospital - Behavioral Health Center

Background

Tamme G. Booth, a registered nurse of Black descent and Christian faith, worked for New York Presbyterian Hospital—Behavioral Health Center from April 2002 until September 2021. She alleged that she was not selected for a Clinical Manager position because of a prior racial-discrimination complaint and that the hospital later maintained an understaffed unit after she filed a formal racial-discrimination complaint.

Booth also alleged that her religious beliefs prevented her from receiving the COVID-19 vaccine. After the hospital adopted a vaccination policy allowing possible exemptions, she requested a religious accommodation. New York State later adopted 10 N.Y.C.R.R. § 2.61, which required employees of covered entities to be vaccinated and did not provide for religious accommodations. The hospital denied or revoked accommodation requests and terminated Booth after she did not comply with the vaccination requirement.

Claims and the Court’s Analysis

The defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which tests whether a complaint alleges enough facts to state a legally plausible claim.

Racial discrimination claims under federal law. The court held that Booth’s racial-discrimination allegations under Title VII were based on events occurring in 2020 through February 2021. Because she filed her discrimination charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission outside the 300-day filing period applicable to New York residents, the court treated those federal racial-discrimination claims as time-barred. The court therefore addressed her Title VII claims only as religious claims.

Religious discrimination. The court dismissed Booth’s religious-discrimination claims under Title VII and the New York State Human Rights Law. It held that her requested blanket exemption from the vaccination requirement would have required the hospital to violate Section 2.61. Under the legal standard applied by the court, an accommodation that creates that kind of legal conflict is an undue hardship for the employer.

Religious retaliation. The court dismissed Booth’s religious-retaliation claims under Title VII and the New York State Human Rights Law. It held that the hospital’s decision to terminate her so that it could comply with Section 2.61 broke any possible causal connection between her request for a religious exemption and her termination. The court stated that terminating her to comply with the law was not an unlawful employment practice.

Religious hostile work environment. The court dismissed Booth’s hostile-work-environment claims based on religion. It found that the alleged conduct consisted primarily of emails and two in-person incidents in which supervisors urged her to take the vaccine. The court concluded that these allegations did not describe conduct severe or pervasive enough to create an objectively hostile or abusive workplace, and that Booth did not allege that the friction was based on hostility toward her religious beliefs.

Constitutional claims. Booth asserted claims under the First, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and under Article I of the New York Constitution. The court noted that Booth did not oppose dismissal of these claims and dismissed them with prejudice.

Remaining state-law claims. The remaining claims involved alleged racial discrimination and retaliation under New York law and alleged aiding and abetting of religious and racial discrimination. After dismissing all claims over which it had original federal jurisdiction, the court declined to retain supplemental jurisdiction—the court’s authority to hear related state-law claims in the same case.

Disposition

The court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss in its entirety. Booth’s first and second causes of action under Title VII and her sixth through ninth causes of action under the federal and state constitutions were dismissed with prejudice. The religious portions of her third and fourth causes of action under the New York State Human Rights Law were also dismissed with prejudice. The racial portions of those causes of action were dismissed without prejudice to renewal in New York State court. The fifth cause of action was likewise dismissed without prejudice to renewal in New York State court. The clerk was directed to terminate the motion and the action.