UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Panama City DIVISION

VALORY LEWIS, 

Plaintiff, 

V. CASE NO. 5:20cv233-TKW-MJF

MHM HEALTH 

PROFESSIONALS, LLC.,

Defendant. 

_______________________/

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, VALORY BROOKE LEWIS, hereby sues Defendant, MHM 

HEALTH PROFESSIONALS, LLC, and alleges:

NATURE OF THE ACTION

1. This is an action brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 

1990 (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq.; and the Family and Medical Leave Act of 

1993 (FMLA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 2612, 2624.

2. This action involves claims which are, individually, in excess of Fifteen 

Thousand Dollars ($15,000.00), exclusive of costs and interest.

Case 5:20-cv-00233-TKW-MJF Document 12 Filed 09/30/20 Page 1 of 13
2

THE PARTIES

3. At all times pertinent hereto, Plaintiff, VALORY BROOKE LEWIS, 

was a resident of Florida and was employed by Defendant in Sneads, Jackson County

at a Florida Department of Corrections (FDOC) facility known as Apalachee 

Correctional Institution.

4. At all times pertinent hereto, Defendant, MHM HEALTH 

PROFESSIONALS, LLC (“MHM”), existed under the laws of the State of Florida 

as a foreign corporation and conducted business in Florida, including at an FDOC 

facility located in Sneads, Jackson County, known as Apalachee CI, where it 

employed Plaintiff as a Registered Nurse. Defendant MHM was an “employer” as 

that term is used under the applicable laws identified above. Defendant was 

Plaintiff’s employer as it relates to the claims asserted herein.

CONDITIONS PRECEDENT

5. Plaintiff satisfied all conditions precedent to this action in that Plaintiff 

filed charges of discrimination with the FCHR and EEOC. This action is timely 

filed thereafter.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

6. Plaintiff was employed by Defendant as a Registered Nurse at a Florida 

Department of Corrections facility in Jackson County known as Apalachee 

Case 5:20-cv-00233-TKW-MJF Document 12 Filed 09/30/20 Page 2 of 13
3

Correctional Institution from July 2014 to February 5, 2018, at which point her 

employment with Defendant was wrongfully terminated. 

7. At all times material to this action, Plaintiff suffered from a serious 

medical condition (migraine headaches) of which Defendant was aware. Plaintiff’s 

minor daughter1also suffered from a serious medical condition of which Defendant 

was aware. Thus Plaintiff was a member of a protected class due to Plaintiff’s actual 

or perceived disability and record of impairment, and due to Plaintiff’s association 

with her daughter who was likewise disabled, and perceived as disabled by 

Defendant. 

8. Instead of accommodating Plaintiff for either of these disability-related 

impairments, Defendant subjected Plaintiff to disparate treatment and held her to a 

different standard than other non-disabled employees. 

9. Plaintiff disclosed the conditions which impacted both Plaintiff and her 

daughter to Director of Nursing Clarissa Cooper at the beginning of her employment 

with Defendant. 

10. Plaintiff raised the issue of the conditions which impacted both herself 

and her daughter again in July of 2017 when she applied for FMLA protection. 

Defendant’s mistreatment of Plaintiff became more severe following Plaintiff’s 

request for FMLA protection. 

1 Plaintiff’s daughter’s medical condition is not disclosed herein because she is a minor. 

Case 5:20-cv-00233-TKW-MJF Document 12 Filed 09/30/20 Page 3 of 13
4

11. The disparate treatment came primarily from Clarissa Cooper, Health 

Services Administrator Rhonda McAlpin, and HR Representatives Sara Brus and 

Kathleen Down.

12. Plaintiff received a final counseling on January 24, 2018 based upon 

allegations made against Plaintiff regarding an alleged failure to properly secure a 

syringe. Only Plaintiff was counseled for this issue despite the fact that other 

employees regularly engaged in similar practices. 

13. Shortly thereafter, Plaintiff’s employment was terminated on February 

5, 2018. The termination of Plaintiff’s employment is unsupported by any legitimate 

reason, and is in fact due to the disabilities form which Plaintiff and her daughter 

suffered, the request for accommodation Plaintiff made as a result of the disabilities, 

and Plaintiff’s request for medical leave protected under the FMLA.

14. Plaintiff retained the undersigned to represent her interests in this cause 

and is obligated to pay a fee for these services. Defendant should be made to pay 

said fees under the laws referenced herein.

COUNT I

DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION

15. Paragraphs 1 through 14 are re-alleged and incorporated herein by 

reference.

Case 5:20-cv-00233-TKW-MJF Document 12 Filed 09/30/20 Page 4 of 13
5

16. This count sets forth a claim against Defendant for disability 

discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), 42 U.S.C. 

§§ 12101 et seq.

17. Plaintiff has been the victim of discrimination on the basis of her 

disability and/or perceived disability. During the course of Plaintiff’s employment 

with Defendant, she was treated differently than similarly situated nondisabled/perceived-as-disabled employees.

18. Plaintiff requested to report to work late and leave early on a limited 

number of days as an accommodation to care for both herself and her child. 

Defendant ostensibly agreed, but later disciplined Plaintiff for taking approved 

leave. 

19. There is no question that Defendant was aware of the conditions which 

negatively impacted both Plaintiff and her daughter, and the resultant disparate 

treatment which Plaintiff suffered as a result because Plaintiff made multiple written 

complaints to Defendant regarding the same:

October 13, 2017: “My daughter has been going through 

some major health issues so I talked openly with Mrs. 

Cooper to keep her informed of all that was going on, and 

how it was contributing to my own health issues, and so 

she would be aware of upcoming dr appointments, ect. The 

very next day I was called into her office for a final 

warning regarding my time/ attendance.”

November 14, 2017: “I was accused of leaving work for 

another employee to do, when I was following my 

Case 5:20-cv-00233-TKW-MJF Document 12 Filed 09/30/20 Page 5 of 13
6

clinician's order, and then orders and notes that I signed 

off were changed.”

November 28, 2017: “And, as far as my time and 

attendance goes, if Mrs. Cooper asked you to take a look 

at mine in particular, I take full responsibility for it, but I 

know that she did NOT include the days where she gave 

permission for me to arrive late or leave early due to 

helping my daughter get ready for school for pictures, MD 

appointments, ect. Permission was asked and always 

approved, even if not reflected.” 

20. Defendant is liable for the differential treatment of Plaintiff which 

adversely affected the terms and conditions of Plaintiff’s employment with 

Defendant. The specific differential treatment in question which Plaintiff suffered 

includes oral approval for time off followed by written discipline issued as though 

no permission had been given, ostracization of Plaintiff for the conditions which 

negatively impacted both Plaintiff and her daughter, and ultimately wrongful 

termination. 

21. Defendant controlled the actions and inactions of the persons making 

decisions affecting Plaintiff, or it knew or should have known of these actions and 

inactions, and failed to take prompt and adequate remedial action, or took no action 

at all to prevent the abuses to Plaintiff.

22. In essence, the actions of agents of Defendant, which were each 

condoned and ratified by Defendant, were disability/perceived-disability based and 

in violation of the laws set forth herein.

Case 5:20-cv-00233-TKW-MJF Document 12 Filed 09/30/20 Page 6 of 13
7

23. The discrimination complained of herein affected a term, condition, or 

privilege of Plaintiff's continued employment with Defendant. Plaintiff was 

wrongfully harassed with unwarranted discipline, and ultimately terminated. The 

events set forth herein led, at least in part, to Plaintiff’s termination. 

24. Defendant's conduct and omissions constitutes intentional 

discrimination and unlawful employment practices based upon disability or 

perceived disability and/or Plaintiff’s record of impairment.

25. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's conduct described 

above, Plaintiff has suffered emotional distress, mental pain and suffering, past and 

future pecuniary losses, inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life 

and other non-pecuniary losses, along with lost back and front pay, interest on pay,

bonuses, and other benefits. These damages have occurred in the past, are permanent 

and continuing. Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive/equitable relief and punitive 

damages.

COUNT II

DISABILITY–ASSOCIATIONAL DISCRIMINATION

26. Paragraphs 1 through 14, and 19 are re-alleged and incorporated herein 

by reference.

27. This count sets forth a claim against Defendant for disabilityassociational discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 

(ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq.

Case 5:20-cv-00233-TKW-MJF Document 12 Filed 09/30/20 Page 7 of 13
8

28. Plaintiff has been the victim of discrimination on the basis of her 

association with her disabled or perceived-as-disabled daughter. During the course 

of Plaintiff’s employment with Defendant, she was treated differently than similarly 

situated employees who were not associated with disabled people.

29. Plaintiff requested to report to work late and leave early on a limited 

number of days as an accommodation to care for both herself and her child. 

Defendant ostensibly agreed, but later disciplined Plaintiff for taking approved 

leave. 

30. Defendant is liable for the differential treatment of Plaintiff which 

adversely affected the terms and conditions of Plaintiff’s employment with 

Defendant. The specific differential treatment in question which Plaintiff suffered 

includes oral approval for time off followed by written discipline issued as though 

no permission had been given, ostracization of Plaintiff for the conditions which 

negatively impacted both Plaintiff and her daughter, and ultimately wrongful 

termination.

31. Defendant controlled the actions and inactions of the persons making 

decisions affecting Plaintiff, or it knew or should have known of these actions and 

inactions, and failed to take prompt and adequate remedial action or took no action 

at all to prevent the abuses to Plaintiff.

Case 5:20-cv-00233-TKW-MJF Document 12 Filed 09/30/20 Page 8 of 13
9

32. In essence, the actions of agents of Defendant, which were each 

condoned and ratified by Defendant, were associational-disability based and in 

violation of the laws set forth herein.

33. The discrimination complained of herein affected a term, condition, or 

privilege of Plaintiff's continued employment with Defendant. Plaintiff was 

wrongfully harassed with unwarranted discipline, and ultimately terminated. The 

events set forth herein led, at least in part, to Plaintiff’s termination. 

34. Defendant's conduct and omissions constitutes intentional 

discrimination and unlawful employment practices based upon Plaintiff’s known 

association with her disabled, or perceived-as-disabled daughter.

35. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's conduct described 

above, Plaintiff has suffered emotional distress, mental pain and suffering, past and 

future pecuniary losses, inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life 

and other non-pecuniary losses, along with lost back and front pay, interest on pay, 

bonuses, and other benefits. These damages have occurred in the past, are permanent 

and continuing. Plaintiff is entitled to injunctive/equitable relief and punitive 

damages.

COUNT III

VIOLATION OF THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT

36. Paragraphs 1 through 14, and 19 are re-alleged and incorporated herein 

by reference.

Case 5:20-cv-00233-TKW-MJF Document 12 Filed 09/30/20 Page 9 of 13
10

37. This count sets forth a claim against Defendant for violation of the 

Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (FMLA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 2612, 2624.

38. This is an action against Defendant for harassing Plaintiff due to using 

intermittent leave for a known serious medical condition of Plaintiff’s daughter as 

well as her own known serious medical condition, and for terminating Plaintiff for 

taking time off that was protected under the FMLA. This is both an interference and 

retaliation case.

39. After taking intermittent leave for both Plaintiff’s and Plaintiff’s 

daughter’s serious health conditions, Defendant made changes to Plaintiff’s work 

environment (including but not limited to modifying Plaintiff’s schedule) and 

subjected Plaintiff to hostility due to her and her daughter’s known serious medical 

conditions. Defendant then took adverse personnel actions against Plaintiff for using 

protected leave, and ultimately terminated her employment because of her need for 

leave.

40. Plaintiff was denied rights and benefits conferred by the FMLA. As 

stated supra, Plaintiff made Clarissa Cooper aware of the disabling conditions which 

negatively impact both Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s daughter around the same time she 

was hired. Defendant did not inquire further or provide Plaintiff with any FMLA 

documentation or forms as required by the FMLA. The FMLA requires Defendant 

Case 5:20-cv-00233-TKW-MJF Document 12 Filed 09/30/20 Page 10 of 13
11

to inquire prior to a formal request for FMLA protection, and Defendant failed to 

meet this requirement, which resulted in the denial of FMLA benefits to Plaintiff. 

41. Prior to Plaintiff’s need for leave for her and her daughter’s known 

serious medical conditions, she worked for Defendant for more than one year and he 

worked for more than 1,250 hours.

42. Defendant’s violations of the FMLA were willful –Defendant was 

aware of the disabling conditions which negatively impact both Plaintiff and 

Plaintiff’s daughter, and nonetheless issued discipline for contrived time and 

attendance issues after Plaintiff was informed she was excused from work pursuant 

to the FMLA. 

43. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's conduct described 

above, Plaintiff has suffered past and future pecuniary losses, inconvenience, lost 

back and front pay, interest on pay, bonuses, and other benefits. These damages 

have occurred in the past, are occurring at present and will continue in the future.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment against Defendant for the 

following:

(a) that process issue and this Court take jurisdiction over this case;

(b) that this Court grant equitable relief against Defendant under the 

applicable counts set forth above, mandating Defendant’s

Case 5:20-cv-00233-TKW-MJF Document 12 Filed 09/30/20 Page 11 of 13
12

obedience to the laws enumerated herein and providing other 

equitable relief to Plaintiff;

(c) enter judgment against Defendant and for Plaintiff awarding all 

legally-available general and compensatory damages and 

economic loss to Plaintiff from Defendant for Defendant’s

violations of law enumerated herein;

(d) enter judgment against Defendant and for Plaintiff permanently 

enjoining Defendant from future violations of law enumerated 

herein;

(e) enter judgment against Defendant and for Plaintiff awarding 

Plaintiff attorney's fees and costs under the various laws cited 

above and as otherwise allowed by law;

(f) award Plaintiff interest where appropriate;

(g) award Plaintiff punitive damages against Defendant; and 

(h) grant such other further relief as being just and proper under the 

circumstances.

Case 5:20-cv-00233-TKW-MJF Document 12 Filed 09/30/20 Page 12 of 13
13

DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY

Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all issues herein that are so triable. 

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Marie A. Mattox

Marie A. Mattox [FBN 0739685]

MARIE A. MATTOX, P.A.

203 North Gadsden Street

Tallahassee, FL 32301

Telephone: (850) 383-4800

Facsimile: (850) 383-4801

marie@mattoxlaw.com

Secondary sources:

michelle@mattoxlaw.com

marlene@mattoxlaw.com

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

Case 5:20-cv-00233-TKW-MJF Document 12 Filed 09/30/20 Page 13 of 13