Case Background
Louis Liner worked as an employee at Terminix Pest Control, Inc., a Louisiana-based pest control company located in Houma, Louisiana, for approximately 14 to 15 years before his termination on September 14, 2021. Throughout his tenure, Liner satisfied all work requirements and received no disciplinary action. The lawsuit arose from Terminix's mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy implemented in August 2021 and the company's refusal to accommodate Liner's requests for medical and religious exemptions from the vaccination requirement.
Cause
The dispute centered on whether Terminix violated federal and state employment discrimination laws by terminating Liner based on his sincerely held religious beliefs and his medical condition. Liner contended that his religious faith prevented him from taking a COVID-19 vaccine derived from aborted fetal cell lines. He also submitted medical documentation from his internist indicating a disability stemming from a family history of blood clotting and myocarditis, both potential side effects of COVID-19 vaccines. His doctor recommended against vaccination due to his family history and CDC warnings about blood clots in individuals aged 35 to 45. Terminix rejected both the religious and medical exemption requests and terminated Liner when he refused vaccination.
Injury
On August 11, 2021, Terminix distributed an interoffice memorandum to all employees stating that continued employment was contingent upon receiving the first COVID-19 vaccination by September 15, 2021. The memo indicated that the only exceptions would be for employees with a disability verified by a physician that prevented them from taking the vaccine. Liner informed Dan Foster, a Terminix officer and manager, that his sincerely held religious beliefs prevented him from taking the vaccine because it was derived from aborted fetal cell lines. Foster responded that the issue had been debunked and reiterated that vaccination was a mandatory employment requirement.
When Liner submitted medical documentation from his internist about his family history of blood clotting and myocarditis, Foster rejected the exemption request, stating that nothing in the report indicated a medical condition preventing vaccination. Foster told Liner that Terminix was not compelling him to get the shot but that anyone who wanted to work at Terminix had to receive it. Foster referenced Liner's religious concerns by noting that even the Pope was telling people the moral imperative was to get the shot. As a result of Terminix's refusal to grant either exemption, Liner did not receive a vaccine and was terminated on September 14, 2021.
Damages Sought
Liner sought compensatory damages for emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, mental anguish, and loss of enjoyment of life resulting from his termination. He also sought past lost earnings representing wages lost from termination through the date of judgment, front pay for future lost wages, reasonable attorney fees and expert witness fees, loss of benefits, loss of accumulated sick pay and vacation time, and punitive damages.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal Representation
Plaintiff: Louis Liner
· Counsel for Plaintiff: David J. Schexnaydre
Defendant: Terminix Pest Control, Inc.
· Counsel for the Defendant: Ravi K. Sangisetty | Brooke Long
Claims
Liner asserted multiple legal theories in his amended complaint. His first claim alleged violation of the Emergency Use Authorization provisions of the United States Code, arguing that Terminix denied him the statutory right to accept or refuse administration of COVID-19 vaccines, which were only authorized for emergency use and not fully FDA-approved at the time. The statute required that individuals be given informed consent before administration of such products.
His second claim alleged violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, contending that Terminix discriminated against him based on his sincerely held religious beliefs by refusing to grant a religious exemption and failing to engage in meaningful accommodations. Liner asserted that Terminix management, specifically Foster, dismissed his religious objections without serious consideration.
Liner's third claim invoked the Americans with Disabilities Act, arguing that his condition—being substantially limited in his major life activity of taking certain medications and vaccines—constituted a disability under the law. He contended that Terminix refused to provide reasonable accommodation and instead placed him under duress by offering him an untenable choice between submitting to the vaccine or losing his job.
Liner also brought a retaliation claim, alleging that Terminix immediately advised him of termination as soon as he stated his inability to provide informed consent due to his medical disability and his sincerely held personal beliefs against the vaccine. Finally, he asserted claims under the Louisiana Employment Discrimination Law for disability discrimination.
Defense
Terminix denied each and every allegation in Liner's complaint, admitting only that it was a Louisiana corporation with its domicile in Houma and that Liner was terminated on or about September 14, 2021. The Defendant asserted 23 affirmative defenses, including that the complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, that applicable statutes of limitations barred the claims, and that Liner failed to mitigate his damages.
Terminix also raised the affirmative defense of undue hardship, arguing that it acted lawfully and did not deny Liner any rights under federal or state law. The company contended that it followed and enforced its policies against discrimination and retaliation and that its employment decisions were made for legitimate, non-discriminatory, nonretaliatory, and non-pretextual business reasons. Terminix asserted the affirmative defense that its actions were justified for safety reasons due to the direct threat posed by COVID-19.
Court Verdict
The jury unanimously answered several key questions on the verdict form regarding Liner's claims. The jury unanimously found that Liner proved he had a bona fide religious belief that conflicted with Terminix's employment requirement. The jury also unanimously found that Liner informed Terminix of this religious belief prior to his termination.
On the question of whether Liner's religious belief was a motivating factor in Terminix's decision to terminate him, the jury unanimously answered yes. The jury further unanimously found that Terminix failed to prove it was unable to reasonably accommodate Liner's religious needs. Additionally, the jury unanimously found that Terminix did not prove that Liner's continued employment would have posed a direct threat to Liner or others in the workplace.
Damages Awards
The jury determined that Liner was entitled to economic damages resulting from his termination. On the question of past lost earnings, the jury awarded Liner $75,000, representing wages lost from the date of his termination through the judgment date.
On the question of compensatory damages for emotional pain, suffering, inconvenience, mental anguish, and loss of enjoyment of life resulting from his termination, the jury awarded Liner $100,000.
Regarding punitive damages, the jury answered yes and assessed punitive damages against Terminix in the amount of $200,000.
The consolidated case also included Plaintiff Gregg Smith, whose jury trial resulted in separate verdicts returned on February 20, 2025. For Smith, the jury found unanimously that he proved a bona fide religious belief conflicting with Terminix's employment requirement, that he informed Terminix of this belief prior to termination, and that his religious belief was a motivating factor in Terminix's decision to terminate him. The jury found that Terminix failed to prove it was unable to reasonably accommodate Smith's religious needs and that Terminix did not prove Smith's continued employment would pose a direct threat to him or others in the workplace. On the question of past lost earnings for Smith, the jury awarded $35,000. On compensatory damages, the jury awarded Smith $50,000. On punitive damages, the jury assessed $200,000 against Terminix for Smith's case.
Final Judgment
On July 18, 2025, the Court issued a final judgment consistent with the jury verdicts. The Honorable Jane Triche Milazzo ordered that Plaintiff Louis Liner was entitled to $50,000 in compensatory damages and $75,000 in back pay. The Court awarded prejudgment interest on both the compensatory damages and back pay from the date of Liner's termination to the date of judgment, calculated using the Federal Reserve Bank's prime rate and compounded on an annual basis.
The judgment provided that post judgment interest would be awarded from the date of judgment until payment at the rate set forth in 28 U.S.C. Section 1961. The Court also determined that Liner was entitled to reasonable attorney fees and expert witness fees in an amount to be determined by the assigned Magistrate Judge in a separate proceeding. Liner was directed to file a motion for determination of attorney fees and expert witness fees with supporting documentation by a date specified in the Court's order.
The judgment was signed on July 18, 2025, in New Orleans, Louisiana. For the consolidated Plaintiff Gregg Smith, the Court entered judgment for $50,000 in compensatory damages and $35,000 in back pay, with prejudgment and post judgment interest calculated similarly.
Court documents are available upon request at [email protected]
