Hratch Yeremian vs. MGM Grand Casino

Case Background

On December 8, 2022, Plaintiff Hratch Yeremian filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court, Michigan Eastern (Case number: 2:22cv12978), alleging religious discrimination and wrongful termination related to the Defendant’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate. This case was assigned to District Judge Gershwin A. Drain and referred to Magistrate Judge David R. Grand.

Cause

Bryant Brown and Hratch Yeremian, long-time employees of MGM Grand Casino, faced termination in 2021 due to a company-wide COVID-19 vaccine mandate for salaried employees. The policy threatened termination for non-compliance. Both plaintiffs submitted exemption requests, citing sincerely held religious beliefs and medical conditions. Mr. Yeremian, a practicing Catholic, explained that his faith opposed vaccines derived from aborted fetal cell lines. Mr. Brown cited medical concerns, including sleep apnea, and shared that vaccination contradicted his religious beliefs. However, the Defendant denied these requests, claiming undue hardship without exploring reasonable accommodations.

Despite enforcing the COVID-19 vaccine mandate on salaried employees, MGM Grand Casino allowed unvaccinated patrons, vendors, and union employees on the premises, undermining its claim of hardship. The plaintiffs proposed reasonable alternatives, such as masking, testing, and social distancing, but MGM dismissed these options. On October 18, 2021, the company terminated both plaintiffs, labeling their refusal to comply as “insubordination.” It is to be noted that Bryant Brown was terminated from this case on August 8, 2024.

Injuries

The plaintiff suffered significant emotional and physical distress due to the alleged religious discrimination and wrongful termination. They endured mental anguish, humiliation, and damage to their professional reputations. The abrupt termination disrupted their lives, causing financial instability and emotional hardship. The Defendant’s refusal to honor their religious and medical accommodations inflicted long-term psychological trauma.

Damages

The plaintiffs experienced substantial financial losses, including unpaid salaries, annual bonuses, and lost benefits. They faced heightened financial stress and diminished future earning potential due to wrongful termination. Emotional distress from the discriminatory actions of MGM compounded these financial challenges. Additionally, the plaintiffs incurred legal expenses in seeking justice for religious discrimination and wrongful termination.

Key Arguments and Proceedings

Legal representation

  • Plaintiff(s): Hratch Yeremian
    • Counsel for Plaintiff: Brendan John Childress | Jonathan R. Marko | Michael L. Jones | Noah S. Hurwitz | Kara F. Krause | Grant M. Vlahopoulos
  • Defendant(s): MGM Grand Casino
    • Counsel for Defendants: Allan S. Rubin | Benjamin Wu | Elyse K. Culberson

Claims

The lawsuit alleged that MGM Grand Casino violated federal and state laws, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and the Elliott-Larsen Civil Rights Act (ELCRA), by denying religious accommodations and retaliating against the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs claimed wrongful termination under discriminatory pretenses and asserted that MGM failed to engage in an interactive process required under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The lawsuit argued that the Defendant intentionally and recklessly discriminated against the plaintiffs based on their religious beliefs and medical conditions.

Defense

MGM Grand Casino defended its actions by asserting that the COVID-19 vaccine mandate aimed to safeguard the health and safety of employees and guests. The company stated that it evaluated all religious and medical accommodation requests but could not grant them in cases where they caused undue hardship. MGM argued that the plaintiffs’ refusal to comply with the COVID-19 vaccine policy, not religious discrimination, led to their termination.

The Defendant contended that reasonable accommodations, such as masking or testing, were incompatible with the essential functions of the plaintiffs’ roles. MGM also disputed Mr. Brown’s claims, asserting he failed to communicate or engage in the accommodation process properly. The company maintained that its actions complied with federal and state laws, including Title VII and the ADA, and requested dismissal of the lawsuit with reimbursement for legal fees.

Jury Verdict

On January 16, 2025, the jury concluded that the plaintiffs’ refusal to receive the COVID-19 vaccine stemmed from sincerely held religious beliefs. They found that MGM Grand Casino failed to prove that accommodating these beliefs would impose an undue hardship. The jury determined that the Defendant’s actions constituted religious discrimination and wrongful termination. They awarded the plaintiffs $33,000 in back pay damages and $100,000 in non-economic damages for emotional distress and related harms, totaling $133,000.

Court Documents:

Documents are available for purchase upon request at jurimatic@exlitem.com