UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION

CASE NO.:

SARAH RICCI,

Plaintiff,

v.

JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.,

Defendant.

_________________________________/

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff, SARAH RICCI (“Plaintiff” or “Ms. Ricci”), pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 2601, et. 

seq. and Fla. Stat. § 448.102, files the following Complaint against Defendant, JOHNSON 

CONTROLS, INC. (hereinafter “Defendant”), and hereby alleges:

INTRODUCTION

1. Defendant unlawfully deprived Plaintiff of her rights pursuant to the federal Family 

Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”) and further unlawfully retaliated against her for her 

opposition to unlawful activity in the workplace in violation of the FMLA and of the 

Florida Whistleblower Act (“FWA”). This is an action to recover all equitable relief, front 

pay, and declaratory relief owed to Plaintiff arising from the course of her employment.

PARTIES

2. During all times material hereto, Plaintiff was a resident of the Southern District of Florida, 

over the age of eighteen (18) years, and otherwise sui juris.

Case 0:20-cv-61339-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/03/2020 Page 1 of 7
2

3. During all times material hereto, the corporate Defendant was a foreign corporation 

authorized to do business in the State of Florida, with its principal place of business at 5757 

N. Green Bay Ave., Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53209.

4. Defendant regularly and recurrently conducts and operates its business within this 

jurisdiction, at 15901 SW 29th Street #801, Miramar, Florida 33027.

5. During all times material hereto, Defendant was vested with ultimate control and decisionmaking over hiring, firing, and disciplinary actions as it related to Plaintiff.

6. Defendant was an employer covered by the FMLA, because (a) Defendant was engaged in 

commerce in an industry affecting commerce, and (b) it was an employer that employed 

fifty (50) or more employees where Plaintiff worked, for each working day during each of 

twenty (20) or more calendar workweeks, prior to the time period in which Plaintiff sought 

leave under the FMLA.

7. Defendant was Plaintiff’s employer, as defined by the FMLA. 

8. Plaintiff was an employee entitled to leave under the FMLA, based on the facts that she (a)

had to care for a parent suffering a qualifying serious health condition under the FMLA; 

(b) was employed by Defendant for at least twelve (12) months; and (c) worked at least 

one thousand two hundred and fifty (1,250) hours during the relevant 12-month period 

prior to when she sought to exercise her rights to FMLA leave.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

9. All acts and omissions giving rise to this dispute took place within Miami-Dade County, 

Florida, within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court.

Case 0:20-cv-61339-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/03/2020 Page 2 of 7
3

10. Defendant regularly transacts business in Miami-Dade County, Florida, and jurisdiction is 

therefore proper within the Southern District of Florida pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 2601 and 

28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1337.

11. Venue is proper within the Southern District of Florida pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 2601 and 

28 U.S.C. § 1391(b).

12. Supplemental jurisdiction over state claims arising under the Florida Whistleblower Act 

are also properly before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367. 

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

13. Defendant is a company engaged in the business of providing a wide range of systems and 

digital solutions for buildings, including but not limited to operations maintenance, repair, 

energy solutions, design and construction, systems integration, fire maintenance, and 

security maintenance. See https://www.johnsoncontrols.com/about-us/our-company (last 

visited June 18, 2020).

14. Plaintiff worked for Defendant as a Project Engineer and a Project Team Leader from in 

about February 2016 until February 2020.

15. In July 2019, August 2019, and November 2019, Plaintiff reported various instances of 

unlawful activity in the workplace to Defendant’s management and Human Resources, 

including discrimination, workplace hazards and violence, and corporate fraud.

16. On December 15, 2019, Plaintiff’s mother was admitted to the emergency room in order 

to treat a serious health condition with her heart, atrial fibrillation, and remained in 

inpatient care for a month. 

Case 0:20-cv-61339-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/03/2020 Page 3 of 7
4

17. On December 16, 2019, Plaintiff informed Defendant of her mother’s serious health 

condition requiring hospitalization in the ICU, which constitutes a qualifying condition that 

gives right to FMLA leave. 

18. After Plaintiff informed Defendant of this qualifying condition under the FMLA, the 

Defendant failed to provided Plaintiff notice of her rights under the FMLA.

19. Plaintiff was required to care for her mother for over a month, but Defendant never 

provided Plaintiff notice of her rights under the FMLA. Instead, Plaintiff was forced to 

work while caring for her mother during very late hours (including during the middle of 

the night), or otherwise use her own personal leave.

20. On January 15, 2020, Plaintiff’s mother was released from the hospital, and Plaintiff 

returned to work on January 21, 2020. 

21. The following month, Defendant terminated Plaintiff without warning.

22. Prior to her termination, Plaintiff had always received exceptional performance reviews.

COUNT I – UNLAWFUL INTERFERENCE& RETALIATION UNDER THE FMLA 

23. Plaintiff hereby re-incorporates and re-alleges the allegations set forth within Paragraphs 1 

through 22 as though fully recounted herein.

24. Defendant interfered with Plaintiff’s exercise of her FMLA rights by refusing to notify her 

of her federal leave rights when she brought a qualifying medical leave situation to 

Defendant’s notice.

25. Defendant retaliated against Plaintiff for attempting to exercise her FMLA rights by taking 

leave when she was required to care for her parent with a qualifying serous health condition 

for over a month. 

26. Plaintiff was protected from interference/retaliation under the FMLA.

Case 0:20-cv-61339-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/03/2020 Page 4 of 7
5

27. Defendant’s interference was willful and/or intentional because Defendant knew or should 

have known of its duty to inform Plaintiff of her FMLA rights as soon as she gave 

Defendant notice of her family member’s qualifying serious health condition.

28. Defendant acted with intent to retaliate against Plaintiff because Plaintiff exercised her 

rights to take leave pursuant to the FMLA. 

29. As a result of Defendant’s willful and/or intentional violations of the FMLA, Plaintiff has 

suffered damages and incurred reasonable attorney’s fees and costs.

30. As a result of Defendant’s willful and/or intentional violations of the FMLA, Plaintiff is 

entitled to liquidated damages.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, SARAH RICCI, respectfully requests that this Honorable Court 

enter judgment in her favor and against Defendant, JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC., and award 

Plaintiff: (a) monetary damages for back pay to be paid by Defendant, (b) an equal amount as 

liquidated damages to be paid by Defendant, (c) equitable relief, (d) declaratory relief, (e) 

reasonable attorney’s fees and costs to be paid by Defendant, and any other further relief that this 

Court determines to be just and appropriate.

COUNT II – RETALIATORY TERMINATION IN VIOLATION OF THE FLORIDA 

WHISTLE BLOWER ACT, FLA. STAT. § 448.102 – RETALIATION

31. Plaintiff hereby re-alleges and re-avers Paragraphs 1 through 22 as though set forth fully 

herein.

32. Plaintiff objected to Defendant’s unlawful activity including sex discrimination, violence, 

and corporate fraud on multiple occasions.

33. Plaintiff had a good faith belief that her objection to unlawful activity entitled her to 

protection.

Case 0:20-cv-61339-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/03/2020 Page 5 of 7
6

34. Defendant did not have any justifiable, legitimate, non-retaliatory reason for terminating 

Plaintiff.

35. As a direct result of the unlawful retaliation alleged herein, Plaintiff was terminated and 

has suffered damages in an amount to be proven at trial.

36. As a result of the violations alleged herein, Plaintiff was required to retain the undersigned 

counsel to validate her rights and is therefore entitled to recover reasonable attorney’s fees 

and costs.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, SARAH RICCI, respectfully requests that this Honorable Court 

enter judgment in her favor and against Defendant, JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC., and award 

Plaintiff: (a) compensatory damages, (b) injunctive relief, (c) back pay for lost wages, (d) damages 

for emotional distress and mental anguish, (e) reasonable attorney’s fees and litigation costs, and 

any and all such further relief as this Court may deem just and reasonable under the circumstances.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff, SARAH RICCI, requests and demands a trial by jury on all appropriate claims.

Dated this 3rd day of July 2020.

Case 0:20-cv-61339-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/03/2020 Page 6 of 7
7

Respectfully Submitted,

USA EMPLOYMENT LAWYERSJORDAN RICHARDS, PLLC

805 East Broward Blvd. Suite 301

Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301

Tel: (954) 871-0050

Counsel for Plaintiff, Sarah Ricci

By: /s/ Jordan Richards_________

JORDAN RICHARDS, ESQUIRE

Florida Bar No. 108372

MELISSA SCOTT, ESQUIRE

Florida Bar No. 1010123

JAKE BLUMSTEIN, ESQUIRE

Florida Bar No. 1017746

Jordan@jordanrichardspllc.com

Melissa@jordanrichardspllc.com

Jake@jordanrichardspllc.com

April@usaemploymentlawyers.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing document was filed via CM/ECF on July 3,

2020.

By: Jordan Richards___________

JORDAN RICHARDS, ESQUIRE

Florida Bar No. 108372

SERVICE LIST:

Case 0:20-cv-61339-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/03/2020 Page 7 of 7