Page 1 of 24

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

MIAMI DIVISION

CASE NO.: 

MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ

and other similarly situated individuals,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

SUNSET COMMUNITY 

MENTAL HEALTH, INC., 

GLADYS LINARES and

ADA LINARES, individually

Defendants,

________________________________/

COMPLAINT

(OPT-IN PURSUANT TO 29 U.S.C § 216(b)

COMES NOW the Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ, and other similarly situated

individuals, by and through the undersigned counsel, and hereby sues Defendants SUNSET 

COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH, INC., GLADYS LINARES, and ADA LINARES

individually, and alleges: 

JURISDICTION VENUES AND PARTIES

1. This is an action to recover money damages for retaliation, unpaid regular and 

overtime wages under the laws of the United States. This Court has jurisdiction 

pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201-219 (Section 216 for 

jurisdictional placement) (“the Act”).

2. Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ is a resident of Miami-Dade County, Florida, 

within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court. Plaintiff is a covered employee for 

purposes of the Act.

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 1 of 24
Page 2 of 24

3. Corporate Defendant SUNSET COMMUNITY MENTAL HEALTH, INC. 

SUNSET MENTAL HEALTH CORP. (hereinafter SUNSET MENTAL HEALTH, 

or Defendant) is a Florida corporation having its main place of business in MiamiDade County, Florida, where the Plaintiff worked for Defendant. At all times 

material hereto, Defendant was engaged in interstate commerce. 

4. The individual Defendants GLADYS LINARES and ADA LINARES were and are

now the owners/partners/officers, and they directed operations of SUNSET 

MENTAL HEALTH. Defendants GLADYS LINARES and ADA LINARES are

the employers of Plaintiff and others similarly situated within the meaning of 

Section 3(d) of the “Fair Labor Standards Act” [29 U.S.C. § 203(d)].

5. All the actions raised in this complaint took place in Dade County Florida, within 

the jurisdiction of this Court.

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

6. This cause of action is brought by Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ, and other 

similarly situated employees to recover from the Defendants regular and overtime 

compensation, retaliatory damages, liquidated damages, and the costs and 

reasonable attorney’s fees under the provisions of Fair Labor Standards Act, as 

amended, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq (the “FLA or the “ACT”).

7. Corporate Defendant SUNSET MENTAL HEALTH is a mental health clinic 

primarily engaged in the care of mentally ill patients. Defendant provides 

diagnostic, treatment, and related services, including transportation services to its 

patients. 

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 2 of 24
Page 3 of 24

8. Defendants SUNSET MENTAL HEALTH, GLADYS LINARES, and ADA 

LINARES employed Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ as a non-exempted, full 

time, hourly local driver, approximately from August 24, 2019, to April 27, 2020,

or 35 weeks. 

9. Within his time of employment, Plaintiff was paid at the wage rate of $12.50 an 

hour. Plaintiff worked at the clinic located at 9415 Sunset DR, Suite 151, Miami 

FL 33173. 

10. Plaintiff’s duties consisted of transporting patients from their homes to the clinic, 

and then returning patients home.

11. During his time of employment with Defendants, the Plaintiff was misclassified as 

an Independent Contractor.

12. Nevertheless, at all times the Plaintiff was an employee of Defendants, under the 

protection of FLSA regulations because; 1) Plaintiff was a full-time employee 

working a pre-set regular schedule; 2) Plaintiff worked for Defendants consistently 

more than 58 hours weekly for a period of 35 weeks; 3)Plaintiff depended 

exclusively on his employment with Defendants, and he did not have any other job 

during his 35 weeks of employment with Defendants; 4) Defendants had absolute 

control over Plaintiff’s hours of work, they provided Plaintiff with his work 

schedule and assigned his duties and tasks; 5) due to the nature of the business, 

Defendants closely monitored Plaintiff; 6) Plaintiff did not have any discretion to 

perform his work assignments or authority to refuse them; 7) the work performed 

by Plaintiff was an integral part of the Defendants’ business; 8) Plaintiff performed 

his work entirely for the Defendants’ facilities, and he transported exclusively to

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 3 of 24
Page 4 of 24

Defendants’ patients; 8) Plaintiff never used any discretion, he just followed preestablished procedures.

13. Because of the foregoing, the Plaintiff, MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ was an employee 

of Defendants, within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 203(e)(1). Defendants were the 

employers of Plaintiff within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 203 (d), and they were 

required to comply with the mandates of the FLSA, as it applied to Plaintiff and

other similarly situated individuals. 

14. During his employment with Defendants, Plaintiff had a regular schedule, he 

worked 4 days per week from Monday to Thursday, from 5:00 AM to 7:30 PM,

(14.5 hours daily). Plaintiff completed a minimum of 58 hours every week. The 

Plaintiff was unable to take bonafide lunch breaks.

15. Plaintiff worked 58 hours per week, but he was paid for an average of 52 regular 

hours weekly. There is a substantial number of hours that there were not paid at any 

rate, not even the minimum wage rate.

16. Thus, Defendants willfully failed to pay Plaintiff minimum wages in violation of 

the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §206, et seq.

17. Plaintiff regularly worked more than 40 hours every week, However, Plaintiff was 

not compensated for overtime hours, as required by the Fair Labor Standards Act.

18. During the relevant time of employment, Plaintiff did not clock in and out, but the 

Defendants were in complete control of Plaintiff’s working hours, and they were 

able to keep track of the hours worked by Plaintiff and other similarly situated 

individuals. 

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 4 of 24
Page 5 of 24

19. Therefore, Defendants willfully failed to pay Plaintiff overtime hours at the rate of 

time and one-half his regular rate for every hour that he worked more than forty 

(40), in violation of Section 7 (a) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 

207(a)(1). and 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq.

20. Furthermore, the Defendants did not pay Plaintiff his wages free and clear. In many 

weeks Plaintiff suffered illegal deductions from his wages. Defendants deducted 

from Plaintiff’s wages $100.00 or $200.00 weekly, every time a patient refused to 

attend to his clinic’s appointment, even though the Plaintiff timely went to pick up 

the patient. As a result, Plaintiff did not receive compensation for many 

compensable working hours.

21. Plaintiff was paid bi-weekly with checks without paystubs showing basic 

information such as the number of days and hours worked, wage rate paid, 

employee’s taxes withheld, etc. 

22. Plaintiff was not in agreement with the lack of payment for overtime hours, with 

the deductions for no-show patients, and he complained multiple times to his

supervisor, Ms. ADA LINARES.

23. On or about March 12, 2020, Plaintiff complained to his supervisor Ms. ADA 

LINARES for the last time. Plaintiff requested to be paid for overtime hours.

24. As a result of the Plaintiff’s complaints, Ms. ADA LINARES fired Plaintiff on or 

about April 27, 2020, using pretextual reasons.

25. The Plaintiff does not have time and payment records. However, he will provide a 

good faith estimate based on a workweek of 58 hours and his wage-rate of $12.50 

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 5 of 24
Page 6 of 24

an hour. After proper discovery, the Plaintiff is going to amend his statement of 

claim.

26. Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ seeks to recover retaliatory damages, unpaid 

regular and overtime hours, the reimbursement of illegal deductions liquidated 

damages, and any other relief as allowable by law. 

27. The additional persons who may become Plaintiffs in this action, are employees 

and/or former employees of Defendants who are and who were subject to the 

unlawful payroll practices and procedures of Defendants and were not paid 

overtime wages at the rate of time and one half of their regular rate of pay for all 

overtime hours worked over forty. 

COUNT I:

WAGE AND HOUR FEDERAL STATUTORY VIOLATION; 

FAILURE TO PAY OVERTIME; AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

28. Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ re-adopts every factual allegation as stated in 

paragraphs 1-27 above as if set out in full herein. 

29. This action is brought by Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ and those similarlysituated to recover from the Employer unpaid overtime compensation, as well as an 

additional amount as liquidated damages, costs, and reasonable attorney’s fees 

under the provisions of 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., and specifically under the 

provisions of 29 U.S.C. § 207. 29 U.S.C. § 207 (a)(1) states, “No employer shall 

employ any of his employees... for a workweek longer than 40 hours unless such 

employee receives compensation for his employment in excess of the hours above

specified at a rate not less than one and a half times the regular rate at which he is 

employed.”

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 6 of 24
Page 7 of 24

30. This cause of action is brought by Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ as a 

collective action to recover from the Defendants overtime compensation, liquidated 

damages, costs, and reasonable attorney’s fees under the provisions of the Fair 

Labor Standards Act, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq (the “FLA or the “ACT”), 

on behalf of Plaintiff and all other current and former employees similarly situated 

to Plaintiff (“the asserted class”) and who worked more than forty (40) hours during 

one or more weeks on or after April 2019, (the “material time”) without being 

compensated “at a rate not less than one and a half times the regular rate at which 

he is employed.”

31. Defendant SUNSET MENTAL HEALTH was and is engaged in interstate 

commerce pursuant to 29 U.S. Code § 203 (r) (2) (C) and 203 (s) (1) (C). Defendant 

provides medical services and receives payments from Medicare and Medicaid. 

Defendant has more than two employees recurrently engaged in commerce or the 

production of goods for commerce by regularly and recurrently using the 

instrumentalities of interstate commerce to accept and solicit funds from nonFlorida sources; by using electronic devices to authorize credit card transactions.

Upon information and belief, the annual gross revenue of the Employer/Defendant 

was always material hereto more than $500,000 per annum. Therefore, there is 

FLSA enterprise coverage.

32. Plaintiff and those similarly situated were employed by an enterprise engaged in 

interstate commerce. Particularly, the Plaintiff was a driver, and through his daily 

activities, used the channels of interstate commerce and transported patients 

recipients of Medicare and Medicaid. Therefore, there is individual coverage.

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 7 of 24
Page 8 of 24

33. Defendants SUNSET MENTAL HEALTH, GLADYS LINARES, and ADA 

LINARES employed Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ as a non-exempted, full 

time, hourly local driver, approximately from August 24, 2019, to April 27, 2020, 

or 35 weeks. 

34. Within his time of employment, Plaintiff was paid at the wage rate of $12.50 an 

hour. Plaintiff worked at the clinic located at 9415 Sunset DR, Suite 151, Miami 

FL 33173. 

35. Plaintiff’s duties consisted of transporting patients from their homes to the clinic, 

and then returning patients home. 

36. During his time of employment with Defendants, the Plaintiff was misclassified as 

an Independent Contractor. Nevertheless, always the Plaintiff was an employee of 

Defendants, within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 203(e)(1). Defendants were the 

employers of Plaintiff within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 203 (d), and they were 

required to comply with the mandates of the FLSA, as it applied to Plaintiff and 

other similarly situated individuals. 

37. During his employment with Defendants, Plaintiff had a regular schedule, he 

worked 4 days per week a minimum of 58 hours every week. The Plaintiff was 

unable to take bonafide lunch breaks. 

38. Plaintiff worked 58 hours per week, but he was paid a weekly average of 52 regular 

hours at his regular rate. 

39. Plaintiff regularly worked more than 40 hours every week. However, Plaintiff was 

not compensated for overtime hours, as required by the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 8 of 24
Page 9 of 24

40. During the relevant time of employment, Plaintiff did not clock in and out, but the 

Defendants were in complete control of Plaintiff’s working hours, and they were 

able to keep track of the hours worked by Plaintiff and other similarly situated 

individuals. 

41. Therefore, Defendants willfully failed to pay Plaintiff overtime hours at the rate of 

time and one-half his regular rate for every hour that he worked more than forty 

(40), in violation of Section 7 (a) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 

207(a)(1). and 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq.

42. Furthermore, the Defendants did not pay Plaintiff his wages free and clear. In many 

weeks Plaintiff suffered illegal deductions from his wages. Defendants deducted 

from Plaintiff’s wages $100.00 or $200.00 weekly, every time a patient refused to 

attend to his clinic’s appointment, even though the Plaintiff timely went to pick up 

the patient. As a result, Plaintiff did not receive compensation for many 

compensable working hours.

43. Plaintiff was paid bi-weekly with checks without paystubs providing basic 

information such as the number of days and hours worked, wage rate paid, 

employee taxes withheld, etc. 

44. The records, if any, concerning the number of hours worked by the Plaintiff and all 

other employees, and the compensation paid to such employees should be in the 

possession and custody of the Defendants. However, upon information and belief, 

the Defendants did not maintain accurate and complete time records of hours 

worked by Plaintiff and other employees in the asserted class.

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 9 of 24
Page 10 of 24

45. The Defendants violated the record-keeping requirements of FLSA, 29 CFR Part 

516.

46. Before the completion of discovery and to the best of Plaintiff’s knowledge, at the 

time of the filing of this complaint, the Plaintiff’s good faith estimate of unpaid 

wages are as follows:

*Please note that these amounts are based on a preliminary calculation based on a 

workweek of 58 hours, after proper discovery, the Plaintiff will adjust his 

calculations.

a. Total amount of unpaid half-time O/T wages:

Three Thousand Nine Hundred Thirty-Seven Dollars and 50/100 

($3,937.50)

b. Calculation of such wages:

Total weeks of employment: 35 weeks

Relevant weeks of employment: 35 weeks 

 Total number of hours worked: 58 average weekly.

 Total number of overtime hours: 18 hours weekly 

 Total number of unpaid O/T hours: 18 hours weekly

 Reg. rate: $12.50 an hour x 1.5=$18.75 O/T rate-$12.75 rate paid=$6.25

 Half-time difference: $6.25an hour

 

 Half-time $6.25 x 18 O/T hours=$112.50 weekly x 35 weeks=$3,937.50

c. Nature of wages (e.g. overtime or straight time):

 This amount represents unpaid overtime wages.

47. At all times material hereto, the Employers/Defendants failed to comply with Title 

29 U.S.C. §§ 201-219 and 29 C.F.R. § 516.2 and § 516.4 et seq. in that Plaintiff

and those similarly-situated performed services and worked more than the 

maximum hours provided by the Act but no provision was made by the Defendants

to properly pay him at the rate of time and one half for all hours worked more than

forty hours (40) per workweek as provided in said Act. 

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 10 of 24
Page 11 of 24

48. Defendants knew and/or showed reckless disregard of the provisions of the Act 

concerning the payment of overtime wages as required by the Fair Labor Standards 

Act and remain owing Plaintiff and those similarly-situated these overtime wages 

since the commencement of Plaintiff and those similarly-situated employee’s 

employment with Defendants as set forth above, and Plaintiff and those similarlysituated are entitled to recover double damages. 

49. At the times mentioned individual Defendants GLADYS LINARES and ADA 

LINARES were the owners/partners/and directed operations of SUNSET 

MENTAL HEALTH. Defendants GLADYS LINARES and ADA LINARES were

the employers of Plaintiff and others similarly situated within the meaning of 

Section 3(d) of the “Fair Labor Standards Act” [29 U.S.C. § 203(d)]. These

individual Defendants acted directly in the interest of SUNSET MENTAL 

HEALTH concerning its employees, including Plaintiff and others similarly 

situated. Defendants GLADYS LINARES and ADA LINARES had operational 

and financial control of the business, determining terms, and working conditions of 

Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees, and they are jointly and severally 

liable for the Plaintiff’s damages. 

50. Defendants SUNSET MENTAL HEALTH, GLADYS LINARES, and ADA 

LINARES willfully and intentionally refused to pay Plaintiff overtime wages as 

required by the law of the United States, and remains owing Plaintiff these overtime 

wages since the commencement of Plaintiff’s employment with Defendants, as set 

forth above. 

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 11 of 24
Page 12 of 24

51. Plaintiff has retained the law offices of the undersigned attorney to represent him

in this action and is obligated to pay a reasonable attorneys’ fee. 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ and those similarly situated 

respectfully requests that this Honorable Court: 

A. Enter judgment for Plaintiff and other similarly situated and against the 

Defendants SUNSET MENTAL HEALTH, GLADYS LINARES, and ADA 

LINARES based on Defendants’ willful violations of the Fair Labor Standards 

Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq.; and

B. Award Plaintiff actual damages in the amount shown to be due for unpaid 

overtime compensation for hours worked more than forty weekly, with interest; 

and

C. Award Plaintiff an equal amount in double damages/liquidated damages; and

D. Award Plaintiff reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit; and 

E. Grant such other and further relief as this Court deems equitable and just and/or 

available pursuant to Federal Law. 

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ and those similarly situated demand trial by a jury of 

all issues triable as of right by a jury.

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 12 of 24
Page 13 of 24

COUNT II:

F.L.S.A. WAGE AND HOUR FEDERAL STATUTORY VIOLATION: 

FAILURE TO PAY MINIMUM WAGE; AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

52. Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ re-adopts every factual allegation as stated in 

paragraphs 1-27 of this complaint as if set out in full herein.

53. This action is brought by Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ and those similarlysituated to recover from the Employer SUNSET MENTAL HEALTH unpaid

minimum wages, as well as an additional amount as liquidated damages, costs, and 

reasonable attorney’s fees under the provisions of 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., and 

specifically under the provisions of 29 U.S.C. §206. 

54. Defendant SUNSET MENTAL HEALTH was and is engaged in interstate 

commerce pursuant to 29 U.S. Code § 203 (r) (2) (C) and 203 (s) (1) (C). Defendant 

provides medical services and receives payments from Medicare and Medicaid. 

Defendant has more than two employees recurrently engaged in commerce or the 

production of goods for commerce by regularly and recurrently using the 

instrumentalities of interstate commerce to accept and solicit funds from nonFlorida sources; by using electronic devices to authorize credit card transactions.

Upon information and belief, the annual gross revenue of the Employer/Defendant 

was always material hereto more than $500,000 per annum. Therefore, there is 

FLSA enterprise coverage.

55. Plaintiff and those similarly situated were employed by an enterprise engaged in 

interstate commerce. Particularly, the Plaintiff was a driver, and through his daily 

activities, used the channels of interstate commerce and transported patients which 

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 13 of 24
Page 14 of 24

were beneficiaries of Medicare and Medicaid. Therefore, there is individual 

coverage.

56. U.S.C. §206 states “Every employer shall pay to each of his employees who in any 

workweek is engaged in commerce or the production of goods for commerce, or is 

employed in an enterprise engaged in commerce or the production of goods for 

commerce, wages at the following rates: 

(1) except as otherwise provided in this section, not less than—

(A) $5.85 an hour, beginning on the 60th day after May 25, 2008; 

(B) $6.55 an hour, beginning 12 months after that 60th day; and 

(C) $7.25 an hour, beginning 24 months after that 60th day

57. Defendants SUNSET MENTAL HEALTH, GLADYS LINARES, and ADA 

LINARES employed Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ as a non-exempted, full 

time, hourly local driver, approximately from August 24, 2019, to April 27, 2020, 

or 35 weeks. 

58. Within his time of employment, Plaintiff was paid at the wage rate of $12.50 an 

hour. 

59. Plaintiff’s duties consisted of transporting patients from their homes to the clinic, 

and then returning patients home. 

60. During his time of employment with Defendants, the Plaintiff was misclassified as 

an Independent Contractor.

61. Nevertheless, always the Plaintiff was an employee of Defendants, under the 

protection of FLSA regulations because; 1) Plaintiff was a full-time employee 

working a pre-set regular within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 203(e)(1). Defendants 

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 14 of 24
Page 15 of 24

were the employers of Plaintiff within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 203 (d), and they 

were required to comply with the mandates of the FLSA, as it applied to Plaintiff 

and other similarly situated individuals. 

62. During his employment with Defendants, Plaintiff had a regular schedule, he 

worked 4 days per week from Monday to Thursday a minimum of 58 hours every 

week. The Plaintiff was unable to take bonafide lunch breaks. 

63. Plaintiff worked 58 hours per week, but he was paid for an average of 52 regular 

hours weekly. There is a substantial number of hours that there were not paid at any 

rate, not even the minimum wage rate.

64. The Plaintiff did not clock in and out. However, the Defendants were able to keep 

track of the hours worked by the Plaintiff and other similarly situated individuals. 

65. Therefore, Defendants willfully failed to pay Plaintiff minimum wages in violation 

of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §206, et seq.

66. Plaintiff was paid bi-weekly with checks without paystubs providing basic 

information such as the number of days and hours worked, wage rate paid, 

employee taxes withheld, etc. 

67. The records, if any, concerning the number of hours worked by Plaintiff MIGUEL 

A. GONZALEZ, and all others similarly situated employees, and the compensation 

paid to such employees should be in the possession and custody of 

Defendant. However, upon information and belief, the Defendant did not maintain 

accurate and complete time records of hours worked by the Plaintiff and other 

employees in the asserted class.

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 15 of 24
Page 16 of 24

68. The Defendant violated the record-keeping requirements of FLSA, 29 CFR Part 

516.

69. Before the completion of discovery, and to the best of Plaintiff’s knowledge, at the 

time of the filing of this complaint, the Plaintiff’s good faith estimate of the unpaid 

minimum wage is as follows:

*Plaintiff wage-rate was $12.50.00 an hour. Florida's minimum wage is higher than 

the federal minimum wage. As per FLSA regulations, the higher minimum wage 

applies.

a. Total amount of alleged unpaid wages:

One Thousand Seven Hundred Ninety-Seven Dollars and 60/100 

($1,797.60)

b. Calculation of such wages: 

Total relevant weeks of employment: 35 weeks 

Total relevant weeks of employment:35 weeks

Total hours worked: 58 hours weekly average

Total number of hours paid: 52 average

Total number of regular unpaid hours: 6 hours average weekly

Fl. Minimum wages: $8.56 an hour 

Min. Wage $8.56 x 6 hours=$51.36 weekly x 35 weeks=$1,797.60

c. Nature of wages:

This amount represents unpaid minimum wages.

70. Defendants SUNSET MENTAL HEALTH, and GLADYS LINARES AND ADA 

LINARES willfully and intentionally refused to pay Plaintiff minimum wages as 

required by the law of the United States, and remain owing Plaintiff these minimum 

wages since the commencement of Plaintiff’s employment with Defendants as set 

forth above. 

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 16 of 24
Page 17 of 24

71. Defendants SUNSET MENTAL HEALTH, GLADYS LINARES, and ADA 

LINARES knew and/or showed a reckless disregard of the provisions of the Act 

concerning the payment of minimum wages as required by the Fair Labor Standards 

Act and remain owing Plaintiff these minimum wages as set forth above, and 

Plaintiff is entitled to recover double damages. 

72. At the times mentioned individual Defendants GLADYS LINARES and ADA 

LINARES were the owners/partners/and directed operations of SUNSET 

MENTAL HEALTH. Defendants GLADYS LINARES and ADA LINARES were

the employers of Plaintiff and others similarly situated within the meaning of 

Section 3(d) of the “Fair Labor Standards Act” [29 U.S.C. § 203(d)]. These

individual Defendants acted directly in the interest of SUNSET MENTAL 

HEALTH concerning its employees, including Plaintiff and others similarly 

situated. Defendants GLADYS LINARES and ADA LINARES had operational 

and financial control of the business, determining terms, and working conditions of 

Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees, and they are jointly and severally 

liable for the Plaintiff’s damages. 

73. Defendants SUNSET MENTAL HEALTH, GLADYS LINARES, and ADA 

LINARES willfully and intentionally refused to pay Plaintiff minimum wages as 

required by the law of the United States, and remain owing Plaintiff these minimum 

wages since the commencement of Plaintiff’s employment with Defendants as set 

forth above. 

74. The Plaintiff has retained the law offices of the undersigned attorney to represent 

him in this action and is obligated to pay a reasonable attorneys’ fee. 

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 17 of 24
Page 18 of 24

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ and those similarly situated 

respectfully request that this Honorable Court: 

A. Enter judgment for Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ and against the Defendants

SUNSET MENTAL HEALTH, GLADYS LINARES, and ADA LINARES based 

on Defendants’ willful violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201 

et seq. and other Federal Regulations; and

B. Award Plaintiff actual damages in the amount shown to be due for unpaid 

minimum wages, with interest; and

C. Award Plaintiff an equal amount in double damages/liquidated damages; and

D. Award Plaintiff reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit; and 

E. Grant such other and further relief as this Court deems equitable and just and/or 

available pursuant to Federal Law. 

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ and those similarly situated demand trial by a jury of 

all issues triable as of right by a jury.

COUNT III:

FEDERAL STATUTORY VIOLATION PURSUANT TO 29 U.S.C. 215 (a)(3) 

RETALIATORY DISCHARGE; AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS

75. Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ re-adopts every factual allegation as stated in 

paragraphs 1-27 of this complaint as if set out in full herein.

76. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to The Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 

201-219 (section #216 for jurisdictional placement) as well as the Florida 

Constitution that vests this action within a court of competent jurisdiction.

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 18 of 24
Page 19 of 24

77. Defendant SUNSET MENTAL HEALTH was and is engaged in interstate 

commerce pursuant to 29 U.S. Code § 203 (r) (2) (C) and 203 (s) (1) (C). Defendant 

has more than two employees recurrently engaged in commerce or the production 

of goods for commerce, and the annual gross revenue of the Employer/Defendant 

was always material hereto more than $500,000 per annum. Therefore, there is 

FLSA enterprise coverage.

78. Plaintiff and those similarly situated were employed by an enterprise engaged in 

interstate commerce. Particularly, the Plaintiff was a driver, and through his daily 

activities, used the channels of interstate commerce and transported patients’

recipients of Medicare and Medicaid. Therefore, there is individual coverage.

79. Because of the foregoing, Defendants’ business activities involve those to which 

the Fair Labor Standards Act applies.

80. 29 U.S.C. § 207 (a) (1) states, "if an employer employs an employee for more than 

forty hours in any workweek, the employer must compensate the employee for 

hours in excess of forty at the rate of at least one and one-half times the employee's 

regular rate...."

81. 29 U.S.C. § 206 (a) (1) states “....an employer must pay a minimum wage of 

$5.15/hr. to an employee who is engaged in commerce....” [29 U.S.C. § 206 (a) 

(1)].

82. Likewise, 29 U.S.C. 215(a)(3) states... it shall be unlawful for any person— “to 

discharge or in any other manner discriminate against any employee because such 

employee has filed any complaint or instituted or caused to be instituted any 

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 19 of 24
Page 20 of 24

proceeding under or related to this chapter, or has testified or is about to testify in 

any such proceeding,......”

83. Defendants SUNSET MENTAL HEALTH, GLADYS LINARES, and ADA 

LINARES employed Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ as a non-exempted, full 

time, hourly local driver, approximately from August 24, 2019, to April 27, 2020, 

or 35 weeks. 

84. Within his time of employment, Plaintiff was paid at the wage rate of $12.50 an 

hour. 

85. Plaintiff’s duties consisted of transporting patients from their homes to the clinic, 

and then returning patients home. 

86. During his time of employment with Defendants, the Plaintiff was misclassified as 

an Independent Contractor.

87. Nevertheless, always the Plaintiff was an employee of Defendants, under the 

protection of FLSA regulations, within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 203(e)(1). 

Defendants were the employers of Plaintiff within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 203 

(d), and they were required to comply with the mandates of the FLSA, as it applied 

to Plaintiff and other similarly situated individuals. 

88. During his employment with Defendants, Plaintiff had a regular schedule, he 

worked 4 days per week from Monday to Thursday, a minimum of 58 hours every 

week. 

89. Plaintiff worked 58 hours per week, but he was paid for an average of 52 regular 

hours weekly. There is a substantial number of hours that there were not paid at any 

rate, not even the minimum wage rate.

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 20 of 24
Page 21 of 24

90. Thus, Defendants willfully failed to pay Plaintiff minimum wages in violation of 

the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §206, et seq.

91. Plaintiff regularly worked more than 40 hours every week, However, Plaintiff was 

not compensated for overtime hours, as required by the Fair Labor Standards Act.

92. During the relevant time of employment, Plaintiff did not clock in and out, but the 

Defendants were in complete control of Plaintiff’s working hours, and they were 

able to keep track of the hours worked by Plaintiff and other similarly situated 

individuals. 

93. Therefore, Defendants willfully failed to pay Plaintiff overtime hours at the rate of 

time and one-half his regular rate for every hour that he worked more than forty 

(40), in violation of Section 7 (a) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 

207(a)(1). and 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq.

94. Furthermore, the Defendants did not pay Plaintiff his wages free and clear. In many 

weeks Plaintiff suffered illegal deductions from his wages. Defendants deducted 

from Plaintiff’s wages $100.00 or $200.00 weekly, every time a patient refused to 

attend to his clinic’s appointment, even though the Plaintiff timely went to pick up 

the patient. As a result, Plaintiff did not receive compensation for many 

compensable working hours.

95. Plaintiff was not in agreement with the lack of payment for overtime hours, and 

with the deductions for no-show patients, and he complained multiple times to his 

supervisor, Ms. ADA LINARES.

96. On or about March 12, 2020, Plaintiff complained to his supervisor Ms. ADA 

LINARES for the last time. Plaintiff requested to be paid for overtime hours.

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 21 of 24
Page 22 of 24

97. These complaints constituted protected activity under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

98. Because of the Plaintiff’s complaints, Ms. ADA LINARES fired Plaintiff on or

about April 27, 2020, using pretextual reasons.

99. At all times during his employment with Defendants, Plaintiff performed his duties 

satisfactorily. There was no reason other than a retaliatory action to terminate 

Plaintiff’s employment with Defendants.

100. There is proximity between Plaintiff’s protected activity and his 

termination.

101. The Defendants’ termination of the Plaintiff was in direct violation of 29 

U.S.C. 215 (a) (3) and, as a direct result, the Plaintiff has been damaged.

102. At the times mentioned individual Defendants GLADYS LINARES and 

ADA LINARES were the owners/partners/and directed operations of SUNSET 

MENTAL HEALTH. Defendants GLADYS LINARES and ADA LINARES were

the employers of Plaintiff and others similarly situated within the meaning of 

Section 3(d) of the “Fair Labor Standards Act” [29 U.S.C. § 203(d)]. These 

individual Defendants acted directly in the interest of SUNSET MENTAL 

HEALTH concerning its employees, including Plaintiff and others similarly 

situated. Defendants GLADYS LINARES and ADA LINARES had operational 

and financial control of the business, determining terms, and working conditions of 

Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees, and they are jointly and severally 

liable for the Plaintiff’s damages. 

103. Defendants SUNSET MENTAL HEALTH, GLADYS LINARES, and 

ADA LINARES willfully and maliciously retaliated against Plaintiff by engaging 

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 22 of 24
Page 23 of 24

in retaliatory actions that were materially adverse to a reasonable employee, and 

with the purpose to dissuade Plaintiff from exercising his rights under 29 U.S.C. 

215(a)(3). 

104. The motivating factor which caused Plaintiff to be fired, as described above 

was his complaint seeking overtime wages from the Defendants. In other words, 

Plaintiff would not have been fired, but for his complaint for overtime wages.

105. The Defendants’ adverse actions against Plaintiff were in direct violation of 

29 U.S.C. 215 (a) (3) and, as a direct result, Plaintiff has been damaged.

106. Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ has retained the law offices of the 

undersigned attorney to represent him in this action and is obligated to pay a 

reasonable attorney’s fees and costs. 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ respectfully requests that this 

Honorable Court:

A. Issue a declaratory judgment that Defendants’ acts, policies, practices, and 

procedures complained of herein violated provisions of the Fair Labor Standards 

Act; 

B. Enter judgment against the Defendants SUNSET MENTAL HEALTH and ADA 

LINARES that Plaintiff recovers compensatory, damages, and an equal amount 

of liquidated damages as provided under the law and in 29 U.S.C. § 216(b); 

C. That Plaintiff recovers an award of reasonable attorney fees, costs, and expenses. 

D. Order the Defendants SUNSET MENTAL HEALTH, GLADYS LINARES, and 

ADA LINARES to make whole the Plaintiff by providing appropriate back pay 

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 23 of 24
Page 24 of 24

and other benefits wrongly denied in an amount to be shown at trial and other 

affirmative relief; 

E. Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ further prays for such additional relief as the 

interests of justice may require.

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff MIGUEL A. GONZALEZ demands trial by a jury of all issues triable as of right 

by a jury.

Dated: June 19, 2020 

 Respectfully submitted,

 

 By: _/s/ Zandro E. Palma____

 ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.

 Florida Bar No.: 0024031

 9100 S. Dadeland Blvd.

 Suite 1500

 Miami, FL 33156

 Telephone: (305) 446-1500

 Facsimile: (305) 446-1502

 zep@thepalmalawgroup.com

 Attorney for Plaintiff 

Case 1:20-cv-22524-KMW Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/19/2020 Page 24 of 24