Case: 1:25-cv-09013 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/31/25 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT )

OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION, )
)
Plaintiff, ) CIVIL ACTION NO.
) 1:25-cv-09013
)
v. )
) COMPLAINT
SILVER CROSS HOSPITAL, )
) JURY TRIAL DEMAND
Defendant. )
)
)
)
________________________________________ )

NATURE OF THE ACTION

This is an action under Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 as amended

(“ADA”) and Title I of the Civil Rights Act of 1991 to correct unlawful employment practices

based on disability and discharge and to provide appropriate relief to an aggrieved individual,

Debra Phillips, (“Phillips” or “Aggrieved Individual”) who was adversely affected by such

practices. As alleged with greater particularity below, Plaintiff Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission (“EEOC” or “Commission”) alleges that Silver Cross Hospital (“Defendant”)

discriminated against Phillips in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) when it

failed to provide her a reasonable accommodation for her disability and discharged her due to her

failure to comply fully with Defendant’s COVID-19 vaccination policy.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 451, 1331, 1337,

1343 and 1345. This action is authorized and instituted pursuant to Section 107(a) of the ADA,

1
 Case: 1:25-cv-09013 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/31/25 Page 2 of 8 PageID #:2

42 U.S.C. § 12117(a), which incorporates by reference Section 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII of

the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C.§ 2000e-5(f)(1) and (3) and pursuant to

Section 102 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, 42 U.S.C. § 1981a.

2. The employment practices alleged to be unlawful were committed within the

jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.

PARTIES

3. Plaintiff EEOC is the agency of the United States of America charged with the

administration, interpretation and enforcement of Title I of the ADA and is expressly authorized

to bring this action by Section 107(a) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a), which incorporates by

reference Sections 706(f)(1) and (3) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f)(1).

4. Defendant is hospital providing inpatient and outpatient services.

5. At all relevant times, Defendant, an Illinois corporation, has continuously been

doing business in the State of Illinois and the City of New Lenox.

6. At all relevant times, Defendant has continuously had at least 15 employees.

7. At all relevant times, Defendant has continuously been an employer engaged in an

industry affecting commerce Sections 101(5) and 101(7) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C.§§ 12111(5), (7),

which incorporates by reference Sections 701(b), (g), and (h) of Title VII, 42 U.S.C. §§2000e(b),

(g), and (h).

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

8. More than thirty days prior to the institution of this lawsuit, Phillips filed EEOC

Charge No. 440-2023-00246 with the EEOC alleging a violation of the ADA by Defendant

Silver Cross Hospital.

2
 Case: 1:25-cv-09013 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/31/25 Page 3 of 8 PageID #:3

9. On August 1, 2024, the EEOC issued to Defendant a Letter of Determination

finding reasonable cause to believe that Defendant violated the ADA when it failed to provide

Phillips a reasonable accommodation based on disability and discharged her from employment.

10. The EEOC invited Defendant to join with the EEOC in informal methods of

conciliation to endeavor to eliminate the unlawful employment practices and provide appropriate

relief.

11. The EEOC engaged in communications with Defendant to provide it with the

opportunity to remedy the discriminatory practices described in the Letter of Determination.

12. The EEOC was unable to secure from Defendant a conciliation agreement

acceptable to the EEOC.

13. On May 27, 2025, the EEOC issued to Defendant a Notice of Failure of

Conciliation.

14. All conditions precedent to the institution of this lawsuit have been fulfilled.

STATEMENT OF CLAIMS

15. Since at least August 2021, Defendant engaged in unlawful employment practices

affecting Phillips in violation of Title I of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12112(a).

16. Defendant instituted a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy in August 2021,

which required all employees to be vaccinated by the end of October 2021. The policy allowed

for exemptions for religion and medical/health reasons. Pursuant to Defendant’s policy:

(a) Employees could submit an exemption request that was expected to be

reviewed by a committee of Defendant’s employees.

(b) Employees who requested a medical accommodation due to a vaccine allergy

could submit documentation of severe allergy to the vaccine or components or immediate

allergic reaction of any severity to a previous dose or known allergy to a component of the

3
 Case: 1:25-cv-09013 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/31/25 Page 4 of 8 PageID #:4

vaccine. Employees requesting an exemption had to submit a COVID-19 Vaccine Waiver Due to

Medical Reasons Form along with physician documentation.

(c) Employees whose medical exemption or accommodation request was denied

could appeal the decision to Defendant.

(d) Employees who remained unvaccinated as of October 31, 2021, and who did

not request an exemption or whose exemption request was denied would be terminated.

(e) Employees who received an exemption were required to undergo weekly

COVID-19 testing and wear a surgical mask as an accommodation.

17. Phillips is a qualified individual with a disability under the ADA, 42 U.S.C §

12102(1) and (2) and 42 U.S.C. § 12111(8). Specifically:

(a) Phillips has a physical impairment in which she had a severe allergic reaction

to the first dose of the COVID vaccine. Her condition included hives, itching and her tongue felt

swollen. The impairment was constant for months, and then episodic for several months. She

required treatment in the emergency room and was off from work for at least two weeks.

Phillips’ condition substantially limited the major life activities of sleeping and concentrating.

The impairment also substantially limited functions of the immune system and integumentary

system (skin). Phillips has a history of severe allergic reactions to vaccines.

(b) Phillips worked for Defendant as an insurance verification lead in

Defendant’s insurance department. Phillips was qualified for the position and could perform the

essential functions of the job. Her performance met Defendant’s expectations and Defendant

noted that she was outstanding in her most recent employee evaluation.

18. In early September, Phillips received the first dose of the COVID-19 vaccine. She

suffered a severe allergic reaction and was treated in the emergency room. She submitted a

4
 Case: 1:25-cv-09013 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/31/25 Page 5 of 8 PageID #:5

doctor’s note to Defendant about her condition and the need to be off from work. Defendant was

aware of her severe allergic reaction to the COVID-19 vaccine.

19. On or about September 27, 2021, Phillips requested a medical exemption and/or

accommodation by completing and submitting Defendant’s “COVID-19 Vaccine Waiver Due to

Medical Reasons Form” and submitted a note from her doctor.

20. Phillips did not receive a response to her request for exemption/accommodation.

21. On December 14, 2021, Defendant informed Phillips that it was placing her on

unpaid leave for being non-compliant with Defendant’s COVID vaccine mandate.

22. Without informing Phillips, on or about December 14, 2021, Defendant denied

Phillips’ request for an accommodation and terminated her employment.

23. Defendant did not inform Phillips that her accommodation request was denied or

that she had been terminated. Phillips contacted Defendant multiple times, but no one responded.

24. Phillips, who believed she was still on unpaid leave, learned in February 2022,

when she requested and received a copy of her personnel file that Defendant had terminated her

employment.

25. Defendant could have accommodated Phillips by requiring her to undergo weekly

COVID-19 testing and wear a surgical mask, which was an accommodation Defendant provided

to other employees, and did not cause Defendant an undue hardship.

5
 Case: 1:25-cv-09013 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/31/25 Page 6 of 8 PageID #:6

26. The effect of the practices complained of above in Paragraphs 15 - 25 has been to

deprive Phillips of equal employment opportunities and otherwise adversely affect her status as

an employee because of her disability.

27. The unlawful employment practices complained of above were intentional.

28. The unlawful employment practices complained of above were done with malice

or with reckless indifference to the federally protected rights of Phillips.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

Wherefore, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court:

A. Grant a permanent injunction enjoining Defendant, its officers, agents, servants,

employees, attorneys, and all persons in active concert or participation with it,

from engaging in any employment practices which discriminate because of

disability in violation of the ADA.

B. Order Defendant to institute and carry out policies, practices, and programs which

provide equal employment opportunities for qualified individuals with

disabilities, and which eradicate the effects of its past and present unlawful

employment practices.

C. Order Defendant to make whole Phillips by providing appropriate backpay, in

amounts to be determined at trial, and other affirmative relief necessary to

eradicate the effects of its unlawful employment practices.

D. Order Defendant to make whole Phillips by providing compensation for past and

future pecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful employment practices

described in the paragraphs above, in amounts to be determined at trial.

E. Order Defendant to make whole Phillips by providing compensation for past and

future nonpecuniary losses resulting from the unlawful practices complained of in

6
 Case: 1:25-cv-09013 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/31/25 Page 7 of 8 PageID #:7

the paragraphs above, including emotional pain, suffering, loss of enjoyment of

life and humiliation, in amounts to be determined at trial.

F. Order Defendant to pay Phillips punitive damages for its malicious and/or

reckless conduct, as described above, in amounts to be determined at trial.

G. Order Defendant to pay prejudgment interest to Phillips.

H. Grant such further relief as the Court deems necessary and proper in the public

interest.

I. Award the Commission its costs of this action.

JURY TRIAL DEMAND

The Commission requests a jury trial on all questions of fact raised by its Complaint that

do not relate solely to equitable relief.

Andrew Rogers
Acting General Counsel

Christopher Lage
Deputy General Counsel

Gregory Gochanour
Regional Attorney
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Chicago District Office

/s/ Armando Fernandez

Armando Fernandez (IL Bar No. 6335857)
Trial Attorney
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Chicago District Office

7
Case: 1:25-cv-09013 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/31/25 Page 8 of 8 PageID #:8

230 S. Dearborn Street, Suit 1866

Chicago, Il 60604
Telephone: (312) 872-9656
Email: [email protected]

Deborah Hamilton (IL Bar No. 6269891)

Assistant Regional Attorney
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Chicago District Office
230 S. Dearborn Street, Suite 1866
Chicago, IL 60604
Telephone: (312) 872-9671
Email: [email protected]

Tina Burnside (WI Bar No. 1026965)

Senior Trial Attorney
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Minneapolis Area Office
330 Second Avenue South, Suite 720
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Telephone: (612) 552-7319
Email: [email protected]