Seaworth sued the company under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, claiming it discriminated against him due to his religious beliefs. The district court granted judgment without trial to the company.

The court of appeals upheld the district court ruling for the employer. The court explained that Seaworth had to show a bona fide religious belief that conflicted with an employment requirement. Even assuming Seaworth could show his religious belief was bona fide, the court said, it was the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), not the employer, which imposed the social security number requirement. The court found therefore that Seaworth's religious beliefs did not conflict with an employment requirement.

In addition, the court said that the company need not accommodate Seaworth's religious beliefs because to do so would cause an undue hardship. The court noted that the company would subject itself to substantial penalties by not providing Seaworth's social security number. The court also rejected Seaworth's argument that the company could seek a "waiver" from the IRS; even if such a waiver could be obtained, the court found the trouble and expense of applying for the waiver posed an undue hardship as a matter of law. Finally, the court ruled that requiring the company to restructure their mode of operation to hire Seaworth as an independent contractor was also an undue hardship.

(Seaworth v. Bob Pearson, No. 99-3014MN, 2000 U.S.App.LEXIS 2695 (8th Cir. February 24, 2000). 2 pages.)