Page 1 of 15

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

CASE NO.: 

YERLY S. ROMERO

Plaintiff,

v.

ACCURATE PAINTING OF

NORTHWEST FLORIDA INC.

Defendant,

___________________________/ 

COMPLAINT

COMES NOW the Plaintiff, YERLY S. ROMERO, and other similarly situated

individuals, by and through the undersigned counsel, and hereby sues Defendant ACCURATE 

PAINTING OF NORTHWEST FLORIDA INC., and alleges:

JURISDICTION AND VENUES

1. This is an action for equitable and monetary relief to readdress the violations of 

Plaintiff’s rights pursuant to the Family Medical Leave Act (hereinafter “FMLA”), 29 

U.S.C. Section 2612 (a)(1), and the anti-retaliatory provisions found in Section 2615 

(a)(1) and (2), and (b) (1). Plaintiff also brings action and for the violation of the Families 

First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”), P.L. 116-136, as amended;

2. This Court has jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1331 and 

§1343. 

3. The venue of this action is properly placed in the Northern District of Florida, Pensacola 

Division, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391(b), since the employment practices hereafter 

Case 3:20-cv-05703-MCR-EMT Document 1 Filed 08/03/20 Page 1 of 15
Page 2 of 15

alleged to be unlawful, were committed in Okaloosa County, within the jurisdiction of 

this Honorable Court. 

PARTIES

4. Plaintiff YERLY S. ROMERO is a covered employee for purposes of the Act. The 

Plaintiff is a resident of Okaloosa County, Florida, within the jurisdiction of this 

Honorable Court. The Plaintiff is a covered employee for purposes of the FLSA, FMLA,

and the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”), P.L. 116-136, as amended.

5. Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING OF NORTHWEST FLORIDA INC. (hereinafter 

ACCURATE PAINTING, or Defendant) is a Florida corporation, having a place of 

business in Okaloosa County, Florida, where the Plaintiff worked. The Defendant was

engaged in interstate commerce. 

6. The Defendant was the employer 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)], the 

Family Medical Leave Act (hereinafter “FMLA”), 29 U.S.C. Section 2612 (a)(1), as 

amended; and the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”), 116 P.L. 116-

136, as amended;

7. All the actions raised in this complaint took place in Okaloosa County Florida, within the 

jurisdiction of this Court.

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

8. Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING is a construction contractor providing full painting 

and related services to residential and commercial accounts along the Emerald Coast of 

Florida. The Defendant headquarters is located at 200 Kelly Road, Suite 104, Niceville, 

Florida 32578. 

Case 3:20-cv-05703-MCR-EMT Document 1 Filed 08/03/20 Page 2 of 15
Page 3 of 15

9. Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING employed Plaintiff YERLY S. ROMERO

approximately from March 23, 2018, to June 10, 2020, or 116 weeks. 

10. The Plaintiff was hired as a non-exempted, full-time painter, and she was paid at the 

wage-rate of $15.00 an hour, 

11. During her time of employment with Defendant, Plaintiff worked 5 days per week an 

average of 40-42 hours. 

12. Throughout her employment with the Defendant, the Plaintiff performed her duties in an 

exemplary fashion. The Plaintiff possessed all the required skills, training, and 

qualifications for the job in question, and performed her duties without significant issue 

or controversy. 

13. On or about June 10, 2020, Plaintiff and her crew were ordered by the owner of the 

business, Todd Webster, to take the COVID-19 test.

14. The next day June 11, 2020, every employee in the Plaintiff’s group took the test in 

Destin, Florida. Plaintiff had been feeling slightly sick 2 days before. Plaintiff did not 

return to work because her symptoms worsened.

15. On or about June 14, 2020, The City called Plaintiff and informed Plaintiff that she 

resulted positive for the COVID-19 test. Plaintiff received instructions to continue her 

quarantine period, and she was prescribed some over the counter medications.

16. Plaintiff immediately informed her direct Supervisor Rodimiro Cardona that she had the 

COVID-19 and about her general health condition.

17. On or about June 15, Supervisor Rodimiro Cardona called Plaintiff and informed her that 

she could come back to work on June 29, 2020, after she finished her self-isolation period 

and she could be fully recovered.

Case 3:20-cv-05703-MCR-EMT Document 1 Filed 08/03/20 Page 3 of 15
Page 4 of 15

18. On or about June 19, 2020, Plaintiff called Supervisor Rodomiro Cardona to ask about 

her weekly check (Plaintiff knew that her co-workers had received their payment).

19. Supervisor Rodomiro Cardona told Plaintiff that the owner Todd Webster said that the 

Defendant was not going to pay Plaintiff anything because she brought the COVID-19 to 

the company and that she was already fired.

20. Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING fired Plaintiff before she was cleared to return to 

work. Plaintiff was unlawfully and retaliatory terminated by her employer.

21. Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING violated Plaintiff’s protected rights under the 

Family Medical Leave Act 29 U.S.C. Section 2612 (a)(1), as amended, when it failed to 

inform Plaintiff that she was eligible to take leave under the FMLA because of her

qualifying medical condition.

22. The Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA or Act) requires certain 

employers to provide their employees with paid sick leave and expanded family and 

medical leave for specified reasons related to COVID-19. 

23. Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING violated Plaintiff’s protected rights under the 

Families First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”), 116 P.L. 116-136, as amended by 

The Emergency Paid Sick Leave Act (EPSLA), which is Division E of the FFCRA, when 

it failed to pay Plaintiff up to 2 weeks or 80 hours of paid sick leave in specific 

circumstances related to the Plaintiff due to the COVID-19 diagnosis, and therefore 

should be punishable under FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 216 and 217.

24. Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING violated Plaintiff’s protected rights under the 

Families First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”), 116 P.L. 116-136, as amended,

Case 3:20-cv-05703-MCR-EMT Document 1 Filed 08/03/20 Page 4 of 15
Page 5 of 15

when it fired Plaintiff due to the COVID-19 diagnosis, and therefore should be 

punishable under FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 215 (a) (3).

25. As a direct and proximate cause of Defendant’s willful, wanton, and malicious acts 

described in part above, Plaintiff has sustained damages for the loss of her employment, 

as well as the security and peace of mind it provided her. Plaintiff has incurred additional 

damages including lost wages, pain and suffering, mental anguish, and other damages 

connected with the loss of her job. 

26. Plaintiff seeks to recover damages pursuant to the Family Medical Leave Act; and to 

Families First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”), 116 P.L. 116-136, as amended;

and any other remedy, as allowable by law.

COUNT I:

VIOLATION OF FAMILY & MEDICAL LEAVE ACT OF 1993;

INTERFERENCE WITH FMLA RIGHTS

27. Plaintiff YERLY S. ROMERO re-adopts every factual allegation about the Family 

Medical Leave Act as stated in paragraphs 1-26 above, or the FMLA allegations, as if set 

out in full herein. 

28. This is an action against corporate Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING for damages and 

injunctive relief for violation of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. § 

2601-2654).

29. At all times relevant and material, the Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING, is an 

Employer under the FMLA, as defined in 29 U.S.C. § 2611(4). The Defendant was 

always pertinent to this Complaint, engaged in interstate commerce, and employed 50 or 

more employees within a 75 miles radius of the facility where the Plaintiff worked. 

Case 3:20-cv-05703-MCR-EMT Document 1 Filed 08/03/20 Page 5 of 15
Page 6 of 15

30. Plaintiff YERLY S. ROMERO is a qualified member of the protected class within the 

purview of 29 USC Section 2601, The Family & Medical Leave Act.

31. The Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING employed Plaintiff YERLY S. ROMERO 

approximately from March 23, 2018, to June 10, 2020, or 116 weeks. 

32. The Plaintiff was hired as a non-exempted, full-time painter, and she was paid at the 

wage-rate of $15.00 an hour, 

33. Plaintiff had worked for ACCURATE PAINTING for more than 1250 hours in the 12 

months preceding her need for medical leave.

34. At all times material, Plaintiff was qualified to perform her job as a painter within the 

legitimate expectations of her employer. 

35. However, on or around June 14, 2020, Plaintiff informed her direct Supervisor Rodomiro 

Cardona that she tested positive for COVID-19. 

36. Plaintiff initiated her self-quarantine related to COVID-19, a qualifying condition under 

the FMLA, and she took 2 weeks of unprotected leave to treat her qualifying medical 

condition.

37. Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING violated Plaintiff’s FMLA protections when it failed 

to inform Plaintiff that she was eligible to take protected leave under the FMLA.

According to 29 CFR §825.300 (a)(1) and (b)(1), employers are required to inform 

employees when they meet the requirements to be eligible for FMLA. ACCURATE 

PAINTING did not inform Plaintiff of her FMLA rights.

38. Plaintiff was expecting to get back to work after her quarantine period and upon medical 

clearance.

Case 3:20-cv-05703-MCR-EMT Document 1 Filed 08/03/20 Page 6 of 15
Page 7 of 15

39. Instead, on or about June 19, 2020, the Plaintiff was wrongfully terminated and her rights 

under the provisions of the Family Medical Leave Act were violated. 

40. Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING is subjected to the provisions of the Family and 

Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. § 2601-2654). The Defendant interfered with 

Plaintiff's rights. 

41. 29 U.S. CODE § 2615 states in pertinent part: 

a) Interference with rights 

(1) Exercise of rights 

It shall be unlawful for any employer to interfere with, restrain, or deny the exercise of or 

the attempt to exercise, any right provided under this subchapter.

(2) Discrimination 

It shall be unlawful for any employer to discharge or in any other manner discriminate 

against any individual for opposing any practice made unlawful by this subchapter.

42. Plaintiff was entitled to FMLA leave. However, Defendant in complete disregard of 

Plaintiff’s protected rights under the Family Medical Leave Act fired Plaintiff, preventing 

her from obtaining the benefits of FMLA to treat her condition, to obey Federal, State, 

and local quarantine orders, and then continuing her job in her original position or an 

equivalent position. 

43. Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING willfully and wantonly denied or otherwise 

interfered with Plaintiff substantive rights under FMLA, 29 U.S.C. Sect 2615(a)(1), (a) 

(2), and 2615(b) (2) which states in pertinent part: (b) Interference with proceedings or 

inquiries........(2) It shall be unlawful for any person to discharge or in any other manner 

discriminate against any individual because such individual—has given, or is about to 

give, any information in connection with any inquiry or proceeding relating to any right 

provided under this subchapter”

44. As a direct and proximate cause of Defendant’s willful, wanton, and malicious acts 

Case 3:20-cv-05703-MCR-EMT Document 1 Filed 08/03/20 Page 7 of 15
Page 8 of 15

described in part above, Plaintiff has sustained damages for the loss of her employment, 

as well as the security and peace of mind it provided her. Plaintiff has sustained mental, 

nervous, and emotional injury. Plaintiff has incurred additional damages including lost 

wages, pain and suffering, mental anguish, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, and 

other damages attendant with the loss of her job. 

45. Plaintiff has retained the law offices of the undersigned attorney to represent her in this 

action and is obligated to pay reasonable attorneys’ fees. 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff YERLY S. ROMERO respectfully requests that this Honorable Court 

will grant judgment:

A. Finding that ACCURATE PAINTING’S actions towards Plaintiff to be violative of 

the Plaintiff’s rights under the FMLA;

B. Awarding Plaintiff YERLY S. ROMERO payment of all back wages lost benefits, 

and other economic damages, including front pay, found by the Court to be due 

under FMLA;

C. Awarding Plaintiff an additional equal amount as liquidated damages for 

Defendant’s willful violation of the FMLA;

D. Granting such other and further relief as is just and proper;

E. Awarding Plaintiff costs, including a reasonable attorney’s fee.

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff YERLY S. ROMERO demands trial by a jury of all issues triable as of right by a jury. 

Case 3:20-cv-05703-MCR-EMT Document 1 Filed 08/03/20 Page 8 of 15
Page 9 of 15

COUNT II:

VIOLATION OF FAMILY & MEDICAL LEAVE ACT OF 1993

RETALIATION FOR EXERCISING FMLA RIGHTS

46. Plaintiff YERLY S. ROMERO re-adopts every factual allegation about the Family 

Medical Leave Act as stated in paragraphs 1-26 and above, or the FMLA allegations, as 

if set out in full herein. 

47. This is an action against corporate Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING for damages and 

injunctive relief for violation of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. § 

2601-2654).

48. At all times relevant and material, the Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING, is an 

Employer under the FMLA, as defined in 29 U.S.C. § 2611(4). Defendant, was at alltime pertinent to this Complaint, engaged in interstate commerce, and employed 50 or 

more employees within a 75 miles radius of the facility where the Plaintiff worked. 

49. Plaintiff YERLY S. ROMERO is a qualified member of the protected class within the 

purview of 29 USC Section 2601, The Family & Medical Leave Act.

50. Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING employed Plaintiff YERLY S. ROMERO 

approximately from March 23, 2018, to June 10, 2020, or 116 weeks. 

51. The Plaintiff was hired as a non-exempted, full-time painter, and she was paid at the 

wage-rate of $15.00 an hour.

52. The Plaintiff had worked for ACCURATE PAINTING for more than 1250 hours in the 

12 months preceding her need for medical leave.

53. At all times material, Plaintiff was qualified to perform her job as a painter within the 

legitimate expectations of her employer. 

Case 3:20-cv-05703-MCR-EMT Document 1 Filed 08/03/20 Page 9 of 15
Page 10 of 15

54. However, on or around June 19, 2020, Plaintiff informed her direct Supervisor Rodomiro 

Cardona that she tested positive for COVID-19. 

55. Plaintiff continued her self-quarantine related to COVID-19, a qualifying condition under 

the FMLA, and she took 2 weeks of unprotected leave to treat her qualifying medical 

condition.

56. Plaintiff engaged in statutorily protected conduct by giving notice to her employer about 

her need for a protected FMLA leave.

57. Plaintiff suffered a materially adverse action of a type that would dissuade a reasonable 

employee from engaging in statutorily protected activity. Specifically, Defendant 

terminated Plaintiff’s employment. 

58. There is a causal link between Plaintiff’s need for an FMLA leave and the adverse action. 

59. Plaintiff was wrongfully terminated from her position in retaliation to her qualified 

position to exercise her rights under the Act thereby adversely affecting Plaintiff. 

60. Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING is subjected to the provisions of the Family and 

Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. § 2601-2654). Defendant retaliated against 

Plaintiff violating 29 U.S. CODE § 2615 and 29 C.F.R § 825.220 which states in 

pertinent part: 

§ 825.220 Protection for employees who request leave or otherwise assert FMLA rights. 

(a) The FMLA prohibits interference with an employee's rights under the law, and with 

legal proceedings or inquiries relating to an employee's rights. More specifically, the law 

contains the following employee protections: 

(1) An employer is prohibited from interfering with, restraining, or denying the exercise 

of (or attempts to exercise) any rights provided by the Act. 

(2) An employer is prohibited from discharging or in any other way discriminating 

against any person (whether or not an employee) for opposing or complaining about 

any unlawful practice under the Act. 

Case 3:20-cv-05703-MCR-EMT Document 1 Filed 08/03/20 Page 10 of 15
Page 11 of 15

61. Plaintiff was entitled to FMLA leave. However, Defendant in complete disregard of 

Plaintiff’s protected rights under the Family Medical Leave Act, acting in bad faith, fired 

Plaintiff, preventing her from obtaining the benefits of FMLA leave, and then continuing 

her job in her original position or an equivalent position. 

62. Defendant willfully and wantonly denied, or otherwise interfered and retaliated against 

Plaintiff for her entitlement to exercise substantive rights under the Family Medical 

Leave Act. 

63. As a direct and proximate cause of Defendant’s willful, wanton, and malicious acts 

described in part above, Plaintiff has sustained damages for the loss of her employment, 

as well as the security and peace of mind it provided her. Plaintiff has incurred additional 

damages including lost wages, pain and suffering, mental anguish, and other damages 

connected with the loss of her job. 

64. Plaintiff has retained the law offices of the undersigned attorney to represent her in this 

action and is obligated to pay reasonable attorneys’ fees. 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff YERLY S. ROMERO respectfully requests that this Honorable Court 

will grant judgment:

A. Finding that ACCURATE PAINTING’S actions toward Plaintiff to be violative of 

the Plaintiff’s rights under the FMLA.

B. Awarding Plaintiff YERLY S. ROMERO payment of all back wages lost benefits, 

and other economic damages, including front pay, found by the Court to be due 

under FMLA;

C. Awarding Plaintiff an additional equal amount as liquidated damages for 

Case 3:20-cv-05703-MCR-EMT Document 1 Filed 08/03/20 Page 11 of 15
Page 12 of 15

Defendant’s willful violation of the FMLA;

D. Granting such other and further relief as is just and proper;

E. Awarding Plaintiff costs, including a reasonable attorney’s fee.

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff YERLY S. ROMERO demands trial by a jury of all issues triable as of right by a jury.

COUNT III:

VIOLATION OF THE FAMILY FIRST CORONAVIRUS RESPONSE ACT 

(“FFCRA”) P.L. 116-136, AS AMENDED

65. Plaintiff YERLY S. ROMERO re-adopts every factual allegation about the FFCRA, as 

stated in paragraphs 1-26 above, as if set out in full herein. 

66. At all times relevant and material, the Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING, is an 

Employer under the FMLA, as defined in 29 U.S.C. § 2611(4). 

67. Plaintiff YERLY S. ROMERO is a qualified member of the protected class within the 

purview of 29 USC Section 2601, The Family & Medical Leave Act.

68. Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING employed Plaintiff YERLY S. ROMERO 

approximately from March 23, 2018, to June 10, 2020, or 116 weeks. 

69. The Plaintiff was hired as a non-exempted, full-time painter, and she was paid at the 

wage-rate of $15.00 an hour, 

70. At all times material, Plaintiff was qualified to perform her job as a painter within the 

legitimate expectations of her employer. 

71. Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING is a large business with less than five hundred (500) 

employees and is therefore subject to the FFCRA

72. Plaintiff had worked for ACCURATE PAINTING for more than 30 days before her need 

for medical leave.

Case 3:20-cv-05703-MCR-EMT Document 1 Filed 08/03/20 Page 12 of 15
Page 13 of 15

73. On or about June 14, 2020, Plaintiff tested positive for COVID-19. 1) Plaintiff was 

subjected to a Federal, State, or Local quarantine or isolation order related to COVID-19; 

2) Plaintiff had been advised by a health care provider to self-quarantine related to 

COVID-19; 3) Plaintiff was under observation because of her COVID-19 diagnosis.

74. Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING violated Plaintiff’s protected rights under the 

Families First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”), 116 P.L. 116-136, as amended by 

The Emergency Paid Sick Leave Act (EPSLA), which is Division E of the FFCRA, when 

it failed to pay Plaintiff up to 2 weeks or 80 hours of paid sick leave in specific 

circumstances related to the Plaintiff due to the COVID-19 diagnosis, and therefore 

should be punishable under FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 216 and 217.

75. Moreover, Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING violated the FFCRA by discharging 

Plaintiff from her position based upon her positive COVID-19 diagnosis and orders from 

her physician to self-isolate. 

76. On or about June 19, 2020, the Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING terminated Plaintiff.

77. Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING was fully aware of the health status of the Plaintiff 

by virtue of the regular updates she provided to her Supervisor Rodomiro Cardona.

78. Before Plaintiff was cleared to return to work by physicians because of the concerns for 

her health regarding the positive COVID-19 diagnosis, she was unlawfully and 

retaliatorily terminated by her employer, ACCURATE PAINTING.

79. Plaintiff’s need for time off work, due to the concerns related to COVID-19 expressed by 

her physicians, was the motivating factor behind her termination. 

Case 3:20-cv-05703-MCR-EMT Document 1 Filed 08/03/20 Page 13 of 15
Page 14 of 15

80. Pursuant to the FFCRA, the Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING was prohibited from 

terminating Plaintiff for her physician-ordered time off work due to COVID-19, and 

therefore shall be punishable under FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 215 (a) (3). 

81. 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 proceeding under or related to this 

chapter, or has testified or is about to testify in any such proceeding,......”

82. Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING willfully and intentionally retaliated against 

Plaintiff by firing her. 

83. The motivating factor which caused the Plaintiff’s termination as described above was 

the 2 weeks leave to treat her COVID-19 diagnosis. In other words, the Plaintiff would 

not have been discharged but for her positive COVID-19 test and related 2 weeks selfisolation period.

84. The Defendant’s 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.

85. The Plaintiff has retained the law offices of the undersigned attorney to represent her in 

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

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff YERLY S. ROMERO respectfully requests that this Honorable Court:

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

complained of herein violated provisions of the Families First Coronavirus Response 

Act (“FFCRA”), 116 P.L. 116-136, as amended;

Case 3:20-cv-05703-MCR-EMT Document 1 Filed 08/03/20 Page 14 of 15
Page 15 of 15

B. Enter judgment against Defendant ACCURATE PAINTING, that Plaintiff YERLY S. 

ROMERO 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 Defendant to make whole the Plaintiff by providing appropriate back pay 

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

affirmative relief; 

E. Plaintiff YERLY S. ROMERO further prays for such additional relief as the interests 

of justice may require.

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff YERLY S. ROMERO demands trial by a jury of all issues triable as of right by a jury.

Dated: August 3, 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 3:20-cv-05703-MCR-EMT Document 1 Filed 08/03/20 Page 15 of 15