Skip to Navigation
University of Pittsburgh
Print This Page Print this pages

May 25, 2000

Pitt seeks permanent injunction in Henson same-sex benefits case

Pitt seeks permanent injunction in Henson same-sex benefits case

Lawyers for the University filed a motion seeking a permanent injunction in an effort to end a four-year-old suit over Pitt's employee health benefits policy. The motion was filed May 23 in Allegheny County Common Pleas Court.

Deborah Henson, a former legal writing instructor at Pitt, filed a complaint in January 1996 with the Pittsburgh Human Relations Commission (HRC) alleging that the University discriminated against her by denying health benefits to her lesbian partner.

Six current Pitt employees subsequently joined Henson in a class action suit.

The civil suit alleges Pitt discriminated under terms of the 1990 Pittsburgh Human Relations Act which prohibits discrimination in employment, including discrimination in compensation, on the basis of sexual orientation.

Last December, Pitt filed for a temporary injunction in Common Pleas Court, which Judge Robert C. Gallo granted April 20. (See University Times, April 27.) The ruling suspended the HRC proceedings, pending appeals.

In his 16-page decision, the judge concluded that "the denial of health benefits to Pitt employees is based upon marital status not sexual orientation," as claimed by the seven complainants.

Gallo further determined that the HRC lacks jurisdiction in the case. "Recognizing that Pitt's health care contract on its face prohibits Pitt from providing health benefits to both same sex and heterosexual unmarried couples, making no distinction between the two, it is clear the Commission would be precluded from finding that an unlawful practice had been committed by Pitt," Gallo wrote.

Christine Biancheria, an ACLU attorney representing the plaintiffs, said Gallo had granted an extension beyond the 30-day limit for filing an appeal to his April 20 ruling. Biancheria said ACLU lawyers expect to take action next week, but she declined to specify what that action would be.

As part of its motion seeking the permanent injunction, Pitt requested in a cover letter that Gallo suspend a ruling until he reviewed any appeals the Henson attorneys file in response to his April 20 decision.

–Peter Hart


Leave a Reply