UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

MONICA J. ROGERS, 

Plaintiff, Case No. 2:15-cv-12312 

Hon. Marianne O. Battani 

vs. 

 

HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM, 

a Michigan corporation, 

 

Defendant. 

STERLING ATTORNEYS AT LAW, P.C. 

Gerald D. Wahl (P26511) 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

33 Bloomfield Hills Pkwy., Ste. 250 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304 

(248) 644-1500 

gwahl@sterlingattorneys.com 

VARNUM LLP 

Terrence J. Miglio (P30541) 

Barbara E. Buchanan (P55084) 

Attorneys for Defendant 

39500 High Pointe Blvd., Ste. 350 

Novi, MI 48375 

248-567-7828 

tjmiglio@varnumlaw.com 

bebuchanan@varnumlaw.com 

DEFENDANT’S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF’S 

COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND

 NOW COMES Defendant, HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM, by and 

through its attorneys, VARNUM LLP, and for its Answer to Plaintiff's Complaint, 

states as follows: 

 

Case 2:15-cv-12312-MOB-EAS ECF No. 4, PageID.16 Filed 08/11/15 Page 1 of 15
2 

RESPONSE TO JURISDICTIONAL ALLEGATIONS 

 1. In response to Paragraph 1 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant states 

that it is without sufficient information to either admit or deny the allegations 

contained therein and therefore leaves Plaintiff to her proofs. 

 2. In response to Paragraph 2 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant admits 

the allegations contained therein. 

 3. In response to Paragraph 3 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant states 

that it is without sufficient information to either admit or deny the allegations 

contained therein and therefore leaves Plaintiff to her proofs. 

RESPONSE TO COMMON ALLEGATIONS 

 4. In response to Paragraph 4 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant states 

that it is without sufficient information to either admit or deny the allegations 

contained therein and therefore leaves Plaintiff to her proofs. 

 5. In response to Paragraph 5 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant states 

that it is without sufficient information to either admit or deny the allegations 

contained therein and therefore leaves Plaintiff to her proofs. 

 6. In response to Paragraph 6 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant denies 

the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

 

Case 2:15-cv-12312-MOB-EAS ECF No. 4, PageID.17 Filed 08/11/15 Page 2 of 15
3 

 7. In response to Paragraph 7 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant denies 

the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

 8. In response to Paragraph 8 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant states 

that it is without sufficient information to either admit or deny the allegations 

contained therein and therefore leaves Plaintiff to her proofs. 

 9. In response to Paragraph 9 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant denies 

the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

10. In response to Paragraph 10 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant states 

that it is without sufficient information to either admit or deny the allegations 

contained therein and therefore leaves Plaintiff to her proofs. 

 11. In response to Paragraph 11 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

 12. In response to Paragraph 12 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

 13. In response to Paragraph 13 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

 14. In response to Paragraph 14 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

 15. In response to Paragraph 15 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

Case 2:15-cv-12312-MOB-EAS ECF No. 4, PageID.18 Filed 08/11/15 Page 3 of 15
4 

 16. In response to Paragraph 16 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

 17. In response to Paragraph 17 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant states 

that it is without sufficient information to either admit or deny the allegations 

contained therein and therefore leaves Plaintiff to her proofs. 

 18. In response to Paragraph 18 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

 19. In response to Paragraph 19 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

 20. In response to Paragraph 20 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

 21. In response to Paragraph 21 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

22. In response to Paragraph 22 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant states 

that it is without sufficient information to either admit or deny the allegations 

contained therein and therefore leaves Plaintiff to her proofs. 

 23. In response to Paragraph 23 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

 24. In response to Paragraph 24 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

Case 2:15-cv-12312-MOB-EAS ECF No. 4, PageID.19 Filed 08/11/15 Page 4 of 15
5 

 25. In response to Paragraph 25 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

 26. In response to Paragraph 26 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

 27. In response to Paragraph 27 of Plaintiff's Complaint, Defendant denies 

the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

 28. In response to Paragraph 28 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

29. In response to Paragraph 29 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant states 

that it is without sufficient information to either admit or deny the allegations 

contained therein and therefore leaves Plaintiff to her proofs. 

30. In response to Paragraph 30 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant states 

that it is without sufficient information to either admit or deny the allegations 

contained therein and therefore leaves Plaintiff to her proofs. 

RESPONSE TO COUNT I: 42 USC 1981, ET SEQ. – RACE 

DISCRIMINATION 

31. Defendant realleges and incorporates by reference its answers to 

Paragraphs 1-30 as set forth in full herein. 

32. In response to Paragraph 32 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

Case 2:15-cv-12312-MOB-EAS ECF No. 4, PageID.20 Filed 08/11/15 Page 5 of 15
6 

 33. In response to Paragraph 33 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

 34. In response to Paragraph 34 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

WHEREFORE, Defendant prays that the Complaint be dismissed in its 

entirety with prejudice and that Defendant be awarded its costs and attorneys' fees 

for having to defend against same. 

RESPONSE TO COUNT II: 42 USC 1981, ET SEQ. – RETALIATION 

35. Defendant realleges and incorporates by reference its answers to 

Paragraphs 1-34 as set forth in full herein. 

36. In response to Paragraph 36 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

37. In response to Paragraph 37 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

38. In response to Paragraph 38 of Plaintiff's Complaint, Defendant denies 

the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

WHEREFORE, Defendant prays that the Complaint be dismissed in its 

entirety with prejudice and that Defendant be awarded its costs and attorneys' fees 

for having to defend against same. 

 

Case 2:15-cv-12312-MOB-EAS ECF No. 4, PageID.21 Filed 08/11/15 Page 6 of 15
7 

RESPONSE TO COUNT III: TITLE VII – RACE DISCRIMINATION 

39. Defendant realleges and incorporates by reference its answers to 

Paragraphs 1-38 as set forth in full herein. 

40. In response to Paragraph 40 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

41. In response to Paragraph 41 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

WHEREFORE, Defendant prays that the Complaint be dismissed in its 

entirety with prejudice and that Defendant be awarded its costs and attorneys' fees 

for having to defend against same. 

RESPONSE TO COUNT IV: TITLE VII – RETALIATION 

42. Defendant realleges and incorporates by reference its answers to 

Paragraphs 1-41 as set forth in full herein. 

43. In response to Paragraph 43 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

44. In response to Paragraph 44 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

WHEREFORE, Defendant prays that the Complaint be dismissed in its 

entirety with prejudice and that Defendant be awarded its costs and attorneys' fees 

for having to defend against same. 

Case 2:15-cv-12312-MOB-EAS ECF No. 4, PageID.22 Filed 08/11/15 Page 7 of 15
8 

RESPONSE TO COUNT V: RACE DISCRIMINATION – ELLIOTTLARSEN CIVIL RIGHTS ACT 

45. Defendant realleges and incorporates by reference its answers to 

Paragraphs 1-44 as set forth in full herein 

46. In response to Paragraph 46 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

47. In response to Paragraph 47 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

WHEREFORE, Defendant prays that the Complaint be dismissed in its 

entirety with prejudice and that Defendant be awarded its costs and attorneys' fees 

for having to defend against same. 

RESPONSE TO COUNT VI: RETALIATION – ELLIOTT-LARSEN 

CIVIL RIGHTS ACT 

48. Defendant realleges and incorporates by reference its answers to 

Paragraphs 1-47 as set forth in full herein. 

49. In response to Paragraph 49 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

50. In response to Paragraph 50 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

Case 2:15-cv-12312-MOB-EAS ECF No. 4, PageID.23 Filed 08/11/15 Page 8 of 15
9 

WHEREFORE, Defendant prays that the Complaint be dismissed in its 

entirety with prejudice and that Defendant be awarded its costs and attorneys' fees 

for having to defend against same. 

RESPONSE TO COUNT VII: AGE DISCRIMINATION – ELLIOTTLARSEN CIVIL RIGHTS ACT 

51. Defendant realleges and incorporates by reference its answers to 

Paragraphs 1-50 as set forth in full herein. 

52. In response to Paragraph 52 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

53. In response to Paragraph 53 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

54. In response to Paragraph 54 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

55. In response to Paragraph 55 of Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendant 

denies the allegations contained therein for the reason that they are untrue. 

WHEREFORE, Defendant prays that the Complaint be dismissed in its 

entirety with prejudice and that Defendant be awarded its costs and attorneys' fees 

for having to defend against same. 

 

Case 2:15-cv-12312-MOB-EAS ECF No. 4, PageID.24 Filed 08/11/15 Page 9 of 15
10 

RELIEF REQUESTED 

Defendant prays that the Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed in its entirety 

and that Defendant be awarded its costs and attorney fees for having to defend 

against same. 

 VARNUM LLP 

 By: /s/ Terrence J. Miglio 

 Terrence J. Miglio (P30541) 

 Barbara E. Buchanan (P55084) 

Attorneys for Defendant 

39500 High Pointe Blvd., 

Ste. 350 

Novi, Michigan 48375 

 (248) 567-7400 

 tjmiglio@varnumlaw.com 

 bebuchanan@varnumlaw.com 

Date: August 11, 2015 

9660005_1.docx 

Case 2:15-cv-12312-MOB-EAS ECF No. 4, PageID.25 Filed 08/11/15 Page 10 of 15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

MONICA J. ROGERS, 

Plaintiff, Case No. 2:15-cv-12312 

Hon. Marianne O. Battani 

vs. 

 

HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM, 

a Michigan corporation, 

 

Defendant. 

STERLING ATTORNEYS AT LAW, P.C. 

Gerald D. Wahl (P26511) 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

33 Bloomfield Hills Pkwy., Ste. 250 

Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304 

(248) 644-1500 

gwahl@sterlingattorneys.com 

VARNUM LLP 

Terrence J. Miglio (P30541) 

Barbara E. Buchanan (P55084) 

Attorneys for Defendant 

39500 High Pointe Blvd., Ste. 350 

Novi, MI 48375 

248-567-7828 

tjmiglio@varnumlaw.com 

bebuchanan@varnumlaw.com 

DEFENDANT'S AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

NOW COMES HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM, by and through its 

attorneys, VARNUM LLP, and for its Affirmative Defenses, states as follows: 

1. Plaintiff’s Complaint fails, in whole or in part, to state a claim upon 

which relief can be granted. 

2. Plaintiff cannot establish a prima facie case of unlawful retaliation 

discrimination based on race. 

Case 2:15-cv-12312-MOB-EAS ECF No. 4, PageID.26 Filed 08/11/15 Page 11 of 15
12 

3. Some or all of the claims asserted in Plaintiff's Complaint may be 

barred by the applicable statutes of limitations. 

4. Plaintiff has failed to diligently mitigate her alleged damages. 

5. Plaintiff’s own actions and/or omissions contributed to the injuries she 

claims to have sustained. 

6. Plaintiff’s claims are barred, in whole or in part, by her failure to 

exhaust administrative, contractual, and/or internal remedies. 

7. To the extent Plaintiff seeks equitable relief her claims are barred, in 

whole or in part, by the doctrines of waiver, unclean hands, equitable estoppel, 

and/or laches. 

8. Defendant’s actions were at all times motivated by legitimate, nondiscriminatory and non-retaliatory reasons. 

9. Plaintiff cannot establish the requisite element of a claim under 

Section 1981. 

10. Plaintiff was not denied any contractual rights, benefits or privileges. 

11. Plaintiff’s claims are barred on the grounds that she cannot 

demonstrate that any of Defendant’s articulated reasons for its actions were a 

pretext for discrimination or retaliatory under any theory of liability alleged in 

Plaintiff’s Complaint. 

Case 2:15-cv-12312-MOB-EAS ECF No. 4, PageID.27 Filed 08/11/15 Page 12 of 15
13 

12. All or some of Plaintiff’s claims and/or damages may be barred, in 

whole or in part, by the doctrine of after-acquired evidence and/or resume fraud. 

13. Plaintiff failed to file a timely charge of discrimination with respect to 

some or all of the allegations of her Complaint. 

14. Defendant reserves the right to assert additional Affirmative Defenses 

upon discovery of facts not presently known. 

 VARNUM LLP 

 By: /s/ Terrence J. Miglio 

 Terrence J. Miglio (P30541) 

 Barbara E. Buchanan (P55084) 

Attorneys for Defendant 

39500 High Pointe Blvd., 

Ste. 350 

Novi, Michigan 48375 

 (248) 567-7400 

 tjmiglio@varnumlaw.com 

 bebuchanan@varnumlaw.com 

Date: August 11, 2015 

9660005_1.docx 

Case 2:15-cv-12312-MOB-EAS ECF No. 4, PageID.28 Filed 08/11/15 Page 13 of 15
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

MONICA J. ROGERS, 

Plaintiff, Case No. 2:15-cv-12312 

Hon. Marianne O. Battani 

vs. 

 

HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM, 

a Michigan corporation, 

 

Defendant. 

_______________________________________________________________ 

RELIANCE ON JURY DEMAND 

NOW COMES HENRY FORD HEALTH SYSTEM, by and through its 

attorneys, VARNUM LLP, rely on the Jury Demand previously filed in this matter. 

 VARNUM LLP 

 By: /s/ Terrence J. Miglio 

 Terrence J. Miglio (P30541) 

 Barbara E. Buchanan (P55084) 

Attorneys for Defendant 

39500 High Pointe Blvd., 

Ste. 350 

Novi, Michigan 48375 

 (248) 567-7400 

 tjmiglio@varnumlaw.com 

 bebuchanan@varnumlaw.com 

Date: August 11, 2015 

9660005_1.docx 

Case 2:15-cv-12312-MOB-EAS ECF No. 4, PageID.29 Filed 08/11/15 Page 14 of 15
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on August 11, 2015, I electronically 

filed the foregoing paper with the Clerk of the Court 

using the ECF system which will send notification of 

such filing to all parties of record. 

 

 By: /s/ Terrence J. Miglio

 Terrence J. Miglio (P30541) 

 Barbara E. Buchanan (P55084) 

Attorneys for Defendant 

39500 High Pointe Blvd., Ste. 350 

Novi, Michigan 48375 

 (248) 567-7400 

 tjmiglio@varnumlaw.com 

 bebuchanan@varnumlaw.com 

9660005_1.docx 

Case 2:15-cv-12312-MOB-EAS ECF No. 4, PageID.30 Filed 08/11/15 Page 15 of 15