IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT 

OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

v.

R.G. & G.R. HARRIS FUNERAL 

HOMES, INC.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

) 

)

)

CIVIL ACTION NO. 

2:14-CV-13710

Hon. Sean F. Cox

Magistrate Judge 

David R. Grand

Statement of Material Facts Not in Dispute

Termination Claim

1. Defendant (“RGGR”) hired Aimee Stephens in October 2007. Ex. 

Q, Stephens Dep. at 50:8-13.

2. Aimee Stephens served as a funeral director/embalmer for the 

Defendant (“RGGR”) for nearly six years under the name of 

Anthony Stephens. Ex. Q, Stephens Dep. at 56:14-15.

3. Before RGGR hired her, Stephens was a licensed funeral 

director in North Carolina. Ex. Q, Stephens Dep. at 20:1-3.

4. Michigan required her to complete a six-month apprenticeship 

before she could become a licensed funeral director in 

Michigan. Ex. Q, Stephens Dep. at 45:20-46:10. 

2:14-cv-13710-SFC-DRG Doc # 52 Filed 04/07/16 Pg 1 of 12 Pg ID 875
5. RGGR hired Stephens as a director/embalmer following her six 

month apprenticeship. Ex. Q, Stephens Dep. at 59:4-8. 

6. On July 31, 2013, Stephens informed RGGR’s owner, Thomas 

Rost, in a letter that she was undergoing a gender transition 

from male to female and intended to dress in appropriate 

business attire at work as a woman from then. Ex. B, Rost 

30(b)(6) Dep. at 109:24-110:10. 

7. Stephens’s gender identity is female. Ex. Q, Stephens Dep. at 

133:6-133:9.

8. Stephens intended to abide by RGGR’s dress code for its 

female employees. Ex. Q, Stephens Dep. at 133:6-133:9.

9. Stephens took a previously scheduled vacation from July 31, 

2013, through August 15, 2013. Ex. B, Rost 30(b)(6) Dep. at 

111:19-112:2.

10. On August 15, 2013, Rost fired Stephens. Ex. Q, Stephens Dep. 

at 80:1-80:6.

11. Rost privately fired Stephens in person at RGGR’s Garden City 

location. Ex. B, Rost 30(b)(6) Dep. at 126:1-10.

2

2:14-cv-13710-SFC-DRG Doc # 52 Filed 04/07/16 Pg 2 of 12 Pg ID 876
12. After firing Stephens, Rost informed RGGR’s employees of his 

decision via facsimile. Ex. B, Rost 30(b)(6) Dep. at 127:19-

128:10. 

13. Rost made the decision to terminate Stephens by himself 

without consulting anyone else. Ex. B, Rost 30(b)(6) Dep. at 

118:1-6.

14. Rost admitted that “the specific reason” he fired Stephens was 

that Stephens was going to present as a female: “he [Stephens] 

was no longer going to represent himself as a man. He wanted 

to dress as a woman.” Ex. B, Rost 30(b)(6) Dep. at 135:24-

136:3.

15. Rost testified that he objected to Stephens’s use of “Aimee” in 

the charge of discrimination, saying that this made him 

“uncomfortable....because he’s a man.” Ex. O, Rost Dep. at

23:4-8. 

16. Stephens’s job performance did not motivate Rost’s decision to 

terminate her. Ex. B, Rost 30(b)(6) Dep. at 108:1-109:9.

17. Rost admitted the only reason he fired Stephens was become 

she intended to present as a woman at work. Ex. B, Rost 

30(b)(6) Dep. at 135:24-137:10.

3

2:14-cv-13710-SFC-DRG Doc # 52 Filed 04/07/16 Pg 3 of 12 Pg ID 877
18. Rost admitted that RGGR’s dress code comports with his 

religious views. Ex. B, Rost 30(b)(6) Dep. at 57:20-59:12.

Religious-Based Defenses

19. Rost owns 94.5% of the shares of Defendant and was the sole 

decision-maker who terminated Stephens’s employment. Ex. B, 

Rost 30(b)(6) Dep. at 26:20-26:24.

20. To the extent RGGR has free exercise or religious freedom 

rights at issue in this litigation, they are those of Rost. Ex. B,

Rost 30(b)(6) Dep. at 29:8-13.

21. Rost is a Christian. Ex. B, Rost 30(b)(6) Dep. at 29:20-22. 

22. Rost’s exercise of his religious beliefs at or through RGGR is 

limited to (1) the placement of “Daily Bread” devotional books 

and (2) cards bearing the word “Jesus” on the front with New 

Testament verses on the back. Ex. B, Rost 30(b)(6) Dep. at 

39:23-40:17; Ex. D, Daily Bread Devotional; and Ex. E, Jesus 

card.

23. Stephens’s intent to present consistently with her gender 

identity violated Rost’s sincerely held religious beliefs and was 

an express motivation for her firing. Exhibit T, Defendant’s 

4

2:14-cv-13710-SFC-DRG Doc # 52 Filed 04/07/16 Pg 4 of 12 Pg ID 878
Responses to Plaintiff’s First Set of Discovery Requests, 

Interrogatory 3. 

24. Stephens’ continued employment at RGGR would not have 

affected Rost’s ability to continue placing either the Daily Bread 

or Jesus cards in the funeral home. Ex. B, Rost 30(b)(6) Dep. at 

57:2-19.

25. RGGR is not affiliated with or part of any church. Ex. B, Rost 

30(b)(6) Dep. at 31:15-31:19.

26. The articles of incorporation for RGGR do not avow any 

religious purpose. Ex. R, Articles of Incorporation. 

27. There are no religious views or values that employees are 

expected to uphold. Ex. B, Rost 30(b)(6) Dep. at 81:18-21. 

28. RGGR’s employees do not regard RGGR as a Christian business 

enterprise. Ex. H, Nemeth Dep. at 19:18-20:4; Ex. I, Kish Dep. 

at 55:10-55:25.

29. RGGR is open 24 hours per day, 365 days per year, and Easter 

is not a paid holiday. Ex. B, Rost 30(b)(6) Dep. at 88:20-89:21. 

30. RGGR serves clients of every religion (various Christian 

denominations, Hindu, Muslim, Jewish, native Chinese 

religions) or none at all. Ex. J, Cash Dep. at 41:19-42:10; Ex. K, 

5

2:14-cv-13710-SFC-DRG Doc # 52 Filed 04/07/16 Pg 5 of 12 Pg ID 879
Crawford Dep. at 32:18-34:9; Ex. B, Rost 30(b)(6) Dep. at

33:19-36:23. 

31. Employees have worn Jewish head coverings when holding a 

Jewish funeral service. Ex. K, Crawford Dep. at 34:20-35:4; Ex. 

J, Cash Dep. at 42:7-12. 

32. RGGR keeps Catholic religious items (crucifixes, kneelers, 

candles) in storage until requested by Catholic (or occasionally 

non-Catholic) clients. Ex. L, Matthew Rost Dep. at 36:20-25; 

Ex. J, Cash Dep. at 42:19-25; Ex. H, Nemeth Dep. at 26:1-10; 

Ex. K, Crawford Dep. at 34:20-35:11; Ex. F, Shaffer Dep. at 

34:16-35:10; Ex. M, McKie Dep. at 29:12-25; 31:11-14. 

33. While the rooms where funerals are held on site are called 

“chapels,” they are decorated to look like a living room and are 

not decorated with visible religious fixtures. This is done 

deliberately to avoid offending people of different religions. 

Ex.B, Rost 30(b)(6) Dep. at 84:2-85:6.

34. RGGR does not sponsor publications which call people to join 

the Christian faith or celebrate Christian holidays. Ex. B, Rost 

30(b)(6) Dep. at 31:20-32:2; 39:2-16. 

6

2:14-cv-13710-SFC-DRG Doc # 52 Filed 04/07/16 Pg 6 of 12 Pg ID 880
35. There are no prayer groups or Bible studies at RGGR. Ex. J, 

Cash Dep. at 47:8-16; Ex. N, Kowalewski Dep. at 30:11-12; Ex. 

H, Nemeth Dep. at 19:18-24; Ex. I, Kish Dep. at 55:10-20; Ex. 

M, McKie Dep. at 27:8-15. 

36. Rost does not have any religion-based exclusions to employee 

medical coverage, such as refusing to pay for abortions. Ex. B, 

Rost 30(b)(6) Dep. at 92:17-93:20. 

37. Rost employs people from different religious denominations, 

and of no religious beliefs at all. Ex. B, Rost 30(b)(6) Dep.at 

40:18-42:11; Ex. F, Shaffer Dep. at 33:10-12. 

38. Rost recognizes that employing individuals with beliefs different 

from his own does not constitute an endorsement of their 

beliefs or activities by the Funeral Home. Ex. B, Rost 30(b)(6)

Dep. at 41:20-42:18. 

39. Rost does not impose his own Christian beliefs on employees, 

stating that he would not terminate an employee because he or 

she had sex outside of marriage, had an abortion, or committed 

adultery. Ex. B, Rost 30(b)(6) Dep. at 138:2-138:16.

40. The business climate causes Rost to act against his religious 

ideals: the practice of cremation instead of holding a funeral. 

7

2:14-cv-13710-SFC-DRG Doc # 52 Filed 04/07/16 Pg 7 of 12 Pg ID 881
His Christian beliefs align him toward performing funerals. Ex. 

B, Rost 30(b)(6) Dep. at 51:1-22. 

41. However, the industry has changed, with a growing preference 

for cremations, and he needs to do them to stay in business. Id. 

at 52:14-53:10. 

Clothing Allowance Claim

42. RGGR provides its male employees who interact with clients,

including both funeral directors and runners, with suits and 

ties free of charge. Ex. I, Kish Dep. at 17:25-19:5, 57:12-58:4; 

and Ex. O, Rost Dep. at 51:1-8.

43. A runner is someone who obtains death certificates and aids in 

body removals. Ex. I, Kish Dep. at 18:25-19:5.

44. For the past 10 years RGGR has purchased these suits and ties 

from Sam Michael’s. Ex. O, Rost Dep. at 13:22-24. 

45. Sam Michael’s invoices RGGR directly for payment. Ex. I, Kish 

Dep. at 19:6-19.

46. Prior to Sam Michael’s RGGR used a different retailer to provide 

clothing benefits for male employees. Ex. O, Rost Dep. at 15:9-

15.

8

2:14-cv-13710-SFC-DRG Doc # 52 Filed 04/07/16 Pg 8 of 12 Pg ID 882
47. Upon hire, full-time male employees are provided two suits and 

two ties and part-time male employees are provided one suit 

and one tie. Ex. O, Rost Dep. at 14:9-19. 

48. After the initial suits are provided, RGGR replaces suits as 

needed. Ex. O, Rost Dep. at 14:20-15:2. 

49. Typically, male employees receive one or two new suits a year

on an as needed basis. Ex. N, Kowalewski Dep. at 22:21-23:1; 

Ex. J, Cash Dep. at 21:4-8; Ex. F, Shaffer Dep. at 44:3-15; Ex. 

K, Crawford Dep. at 19:1-3. 

50. Male employees go to Sam Michael’s to be fitted and obtain 

their suits during work hours. Ex. F, Shaffer Dep. at 44:10-15.

51. These clothing benefits also include tailoring of the suit jackets 

and pants and repairs to the suit as needed. Ex. I, Kish Dep. at 

19:20-24.

52. RGGR spends about $225 per suit and $10 per tie. Ex. O, Rost 

Dep. at 15:3-6.

53. RGGR’s dress code lists “Funeral Directors on Duty” in the 

section governing what male employees must wear. Ex. S, 

Dress Code. 

9

2:14-cv-13710-SFC-DRG Doc # 52 Filed 04/07/16 Pg 9 of 12 Pg ID 883
54. Until October 2014, after the EEOC filed this lawsuit, no workclothing benefits were provided to female employees. Starting in 

October 2014 female employees have been given an annual 

clothing stipend ranging from $75 for part-time employees to 

$150 for full-time employees. Ex. O, Rost Dep. at 15:16-16:12;

Ex. I, Kish Dep. at 20:16-21:3; Ex. P, clothing allowance 

checks; and Dkt. 1.

55. Rost acknowledges, however, that the attire it provides to its 

male employees costs RGGR approximately $235 (part-time) to 

$470 (full-time) per employee. Ex. O, Rost Dep. at 15:3-6.

56. RGGR based the amount of clothing allowance for its female 

employees on what it determined was “fair,” rather than the 

amount it paid for its male employees’ clothes. Ex. O, Rost Dep. 

at 45:12-20. 

57. Rost characterizes the female clothing allowance as “little.” Ex. 

O, Rost at 15:16-17. 

58. Unlike Defendant’s male employees who receive their clothing 

benefits immediately upon hire, Defendant’s female employees 

are required to wait until the next clothing allowance checks 

10

2:14-cv-13710-SFC-DRG Doc # 52 Filed 04/07/16 Pg 10 of 12 Pg ID 884
are issued for all female employees. Ex. I, Kish Dep. at 25:11-

15, 38:15-25.

59. RGGR issues the female employees a separate check each year 

for their clothing stipend. Ex. I, Kish Dep. at 25:11-15.

60. RGGR does not issue a clothing allowance stipend to female 

employee upon hire. Ex. I, Kish Dep. at 38:15-25.

61. Female employees do not purchase clothes while at work. Ex. 

M, McKie Dep. at 25:19-21.

62. Since October 2014, male employees continue to receive suits 

and ties at no cost as before. Ex. O, Rost Dep. at 13:4-9.

Respectfully submitted, 

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT

OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

s/ Miles Shultz

MILES SHULTZ (P73555)

Trial Attorney

s/ Katie Linehan

KATIE LINEHAN (P77974)

Trial Attorney

Dated: April 7, 2016 s/ Dale Price

DALE PRICE (P55578)

Trial Attorney

DETROIT FILED OFFICE

Patrick V. McNamara

11

2:14-cv-13710-SFC-DRG Doc # 52 Filed 04/07/16 Pg 11 of 12 Pg ID 885
477 Michigan Ave., Room 865

Detroit, MI 48226

Dale.Price@EEOC.GOV

Tel No. (313) 226-7808

Fax No. (313)226-6584

Certificate of Service 

I hereby certify that on April 7, 2016 m I electronically filed the 

foregoing with the clerk of the Court by using the CM/ECF system, 

which will send a notice of electronic filing to all record attorneys. 

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT

OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Dated: April 7, 2016 s/ Dale Price

DALE PRICE (P55578)

Trial Attorney

12

2:14-cv-13710-SFC-DRG Doc # 52 Filed 04/07/16 Pg 12 of 12 Pg ID 886