UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION

CASE NO.: 

LEVI JONES,

 Plaintiff, 

vs.

PMG LEASING, LLC,

 Defendant. 

/

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff, LEVI JONES (“Mr. Jones” or “Plaintiff”) files suit against the Defendant, PMG 

LEASING, LLC, (“PMG” or “Defendant”), and alleges as follows:

1. Plaintiff brings these claims for disability discrimination against Defendant for its 

unlawful termination of Plaintiff based upon his disability, or “perceived disability,” in violation of 

the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. (“ADA”), and

the Florida Civil Rights Act, Chapter 760, FLA. STAT. (“FCRA”), and for breach of contract. 

Plaintiff is seeking damages including back pay, front pay, compensatory damages, punitive damages, 

and his attorneys’ fees and costs.

JURISDICTION

2. The Court has original jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s ADA claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1331 as they arise under 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq and has supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s 

FCRA and breach of contract claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367, as these claims are so related to 

Plaintiff’s ADA claim that it forms part of the same case or controversy, specifically, that Plaintiff 

Case 0:22-cv-62286-BB Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/07/2022 Page 1 of 12
2

was discriminated against and treated differently than other employees solely because of his disability, 

and/or “perceived disability.” 

VENUE

3. Venue is proper because Defendant is located and conducts substantial business in 

Broward County, Florida, where the actions at issue took place. 

PARTIES

4. At all times material, Plaintiff was a resident of Broward County, Florida.

5. Plaintiff is protected by the ADA and FCRA because:

a. Plaintiff was a disabled or “perceived as disabled” employee who suffered 

discrimination because of his disability or “perceived disability” by Defendant; and

b. Plaintiff suffered an adverse employment action as a result of his disability or 

“perceived disability.”

6. Defendant was at all material times an “employer” as envisioned by the ADA as well 

as §760.02(7), FLA. STAT.

CONDITIONS PRECEDENT

7. Plaintiff, on or about January 27, 2021, dual filed a charge of discrimination with the 

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) and the Florida Commission on Human 

Relations (“FCHR”) against Defendant. 

8. On or around September 22, 2022, Plaintiff received the EEOC’s Notice of Right to 

Sue against Defendant, giving Plaintiff the right to bring a civil action on his claims within ninety 

(90) days of his receipt of same. 

9. Additionally, more than one-hundred-and-eighty (180) days have passed since the 

filing of Plaintiff’s FCRA claims, rendering Plaintiff’s FCRA claims ripe for filing.

Case 0:22-cv-62286-BB Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/07/2022 Page 2 of 12
3

10. Plaintiff timely files this action within the applicable period of limitations against 

Defendant. 

11. All conditions precedent to this action have been satisfied and/or waived. 

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

12. Defendant offered to pay a Plaintiff, in exchange for his duties, a base salary of 

$35,750 per year, and commissions based on apartment units leased. The specifics of this 

commission package are detailed in the Agreement. See Exhibit A. 

13. Plaintiff accepted this offer and, in consideration of same, commenced his work 

with Defendant on this basis.

14. The foregoing created an enforceable written contract under Florida law.

15. Plaintiff performed his duties as a Leasing Agent from October 1, 2019, until his 

termination on October 16, 2020. 

16. During his time with PMG, Mr. Jones was an excellent employee, and had no 

significant history of attendance, tardiness, or disciplinary issues.

17. Unfortunately, in the summer and fall of 2020, Mr. Jones suffered flareups of 

ongoing disabilities and chronic, serious health conditions, specifically anxiety, depression, and 

alcoholism.

18. On September 22, 2020, Mr. Jones informed his PMG Supervisor, Roxie Ransom, 

that he was suffering these disabilities and chronic, serious health conditions, and that he would 

seek treatment soon for same.

19. Mr. Jones commenced treatment for his disabilities and chronic, serious health 

conditions on September 27, 2020, with licensed professionals at Gateway Recovery Center. 

20. Ms. Ransom, however, never responded to Mr. Jones’s communication of his 

Case 0:22-cv-62286-BB Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/07/2022 Page 3 of 12
4

disabilities and chronic, serious health conditions.

21. PMG retaliated against Mr. Jones by placing him on forced leave, telling him that 

he could not return to work until a so-called “internal investigation” was conducted.

22. Mr. Jones was permitted by PMG to return to work on October 4, 2020.

23. Mr. Jones was forced to report to work earlier than his colleagues and to perform 

menial tasks that his colleagues were not required to perform.

24. Ms. Ransom shifted the more favorable leasing leads to other Agents, such as Julia 

and Matt.

25. Ms. Ransom had been verbally abusive to Mr. Jones, as well.

26. On October 16, 2020, PMG informed him that it had decided to terminate his 

employment, effective immediately.

27. The timing of Plaintiff s disability disclosure and request for reasonable 

accommodation and Defendant’ termination of his employment, alone demonstrates a causal and 

temporal connection between his protected activity and the illegal actions taken against him by 

Defendant.

28. In reality, Defendant’s termination of Mr. Levi stemmed from its discriminatory 

animus toward his very recent request for accommodation under the ADA and FCRA.

29. Any reason provided by Defendant for its actions is a pretext for discrimination.

30. Defendant does not have a non-discriminatory, and non-retaliatory rationale for 

terminating Plaintiff’s employment.

31. Despite the availability of a reasonable accommodation under the ADA and FCRA, 

which would not have caused Defendant an undue burden, and despite the fact that Plaintiff was 

not, and would not be, prevented by his medical condition from completing his assigned job duties, 

Case 0:22-cv-62286-BB Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/07/2022 Page 4 of 12
5

Defendant discriminated against Plaintiff based on his disability and need for medical 

treatment/accommodation.

32. Plaintiff suffered sufficiently severe and pervasive treatment, and ultimately 

termination, because of his disability and/or “perceived disability.”

33. The facts surrounding Plaintiff’s termination create a strong inference of disability 

discrimination in violation of the ADA and FCRA.

34. Mr. Levi is an individual with a disability who, with minimal reasonable 

accommodation, was fully capable of performing the essential functions of his job as a Leasing 

Agent.

35. Defendant did not have a good faith basis for its actions.

36. By reason of the foregoing, Defendant’s actions, and non-actions, affected the “terms, 

conditions or privileges” of Plaintiff’s employment as envisioned by the ADA and the FCRA. 

37. Alternatively, Defendant perceived Plaintiff as being “disabled,” and therefore, unable 

to perform the essential functions of his position, despite the fact that Plaintiff could perform same 

with a reasonable accommodation.

38. Pleading in the alternative, Plaintiff’s impairment did not substantially limit a major 

life activity but was treated by Defendant as if it did. 

39. Pleading in the alternative, Plaintiff’s medical condition constituted an impairment

that limited a major life activity only because of Defendant’s attitude toward the impairment.

40. Pleading in the alternative, Plaintiff had no impairment, whatsoever, but was treated 

by Defendant as having a disability as recognized by the ADA/FCRA.

41. As a result of Defendant’ illegal conduct, Plaintiff has suffered damages, including 

loss of employment, wages, benefits, and other remuneration to which he is entitled.

Case 0:22-cv-62286-BB Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/07/2022 Page 5 of 12
6

42. Additionally, at the time, in breach of the Agreement, Defendant owed Plaintiff 

$7,145.00 in commissions. 

43. To date, Defendant has failed to pay Plaintiff all commissions due, which Plaintiff 

earned, pursuant to the Agreement. 

44. Plaintiff completed all sufficient work under the Agreement and Florida law to vest 

his commissions. 

45. Defendant’s failure to properly pay Plaintiff’ earned commissions constitute a 

material breach of the Agreement under Florida law.

46. Accordingly, in light of the foregoing violations of law and material breaches of 

the Agreement, Plaintiff have suffered damages, and are entitled to their unpaid wages, 

commissions, interest, and attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to Section 448.08, Florida Statutes. 

47. Plaintiff has retained the law firm of RICHARD CELLER LEGAL, P.A., to 

represent him in the litigation and has agreed to pay the firm a reasonable fee for its services. 

COUNT I

BREACH OF WRITTEN CONTRACT

48. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates all of the allegations contained withinParagraphs

1 through 4, 12 through 16, 26, and 42 through 47 above of the Complaint asif fully setforthherein.

49. Plaintiff and Defendant entered into a compensation agreement, as described 

above, in which Defendant agreed to pay Plaintiff commissions throughout the duration of 

Plaintiff’s employment with Defendant, in exchange for the performance of Plaintiff’s work duties 

for Defendant.

50. Plaintiff performed the necessary work under the Agreement to vest the

commissions to which they were contractually entitled, and in consideration of Defendant’soffer

and Plaintiff’ acceptance of same.

Case 0:22-cv-62286-BB Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/07/2022 Page 6 of 12
7

51. Defendant breached the parties’ Agreement, however, by refusing to pay Plaintiff 

for commissions due and owing to him under the Agreement.

52. Plaintiff has been damaged due to Defendant’s willful/continued failure to pay

Plaintiff the appropriate agreed upon compensation, necessitating this lawsuit.

53. Pursuant toSection 448.08, Florida Statutes,Plaintiff is entitled tocosts of thisaction

and reasonable attorneys’ fees.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests judgment against the Defendant for damages and 

prejudgment interest, together with costs of suit and reasonable attorney fees, and such other and

further relief as this Court may deem just and proper. 

COUNT II 

DISCRIMINATION UNDER THE ADA BASED ON DISABILITY

 

54. Plaintiff reincorporates and readopts all allegations contained within Paragraphs 1 

through 41, and 47, above. 

55. The acts of Defendant, by and through its agents and employees, violated Plaintiff’s 

rights against disability discrimination under the ADA. 

56. The discrimination to which Plaintiff was subjected was based on his disability 

and/or “perceived disability.” 

57. The conduct of Defendant and its agents and employees proximately, directly, and 

foreseeably injured Plaintiff, including, but not limited to, lost wages and benefits, future pecuniary 

losses, emotional pain and suffering, humiliation, inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of 

enjoyment of life, and other non-pecuniary losses. 

58. Plaintiff has suffered damages as a result of Defendant’s illegal conduct toward 

him. 

Case 0:22-cv-62286-BB Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/07/2022 Page 7 of 12
8

59. The conduct of Defendant was so willful, wanton, and in reckless disregard of the 

statutory rights of Plaintiff, as to entitle him to an award of punitive damages against Defendant, 

to deter it, and others, from such conduct in the future. 

60. Plaintiff is entitled to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees and litigation expenses 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12205. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests a judgment in his favor and against Defendant for his 

actual and compensatory damages, including, but not limited to, front pay, back pay, emotional 

distress damages, and punitive damages, as well as his costs and attorneys’ fees, declaratory and 

injunctive relief, and such other and further relief as is deemed proper by this Court. 

COUNT III 

DISCRIMINATION UNDER THE FLORIDA CIVIL RIGHTS ACT 

BASED ON DISABILITY 

61. Plaintiff reincorporates and readopts all allegations contained within Paragraphs 1 

through 41, and 47, above. 

62. The acts of Defendant, by and through its agents and employees, violated Plaintiff’s 

rights against disability discrimination under the FCRA, Chapter 760, Florida Statutes. 

63. The discrimination to which Plaintiff was subjected was based on his 

disability/handicap, or “perceived disability.” 

64. The conduct of Defendant and its agents and employees proximately, directly, and 

foreseeably injured Plaintiff, including, but not limited to, lost wages and benefits, future pecuniary 

losses, emotional pain and suffering, humiliation, inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of 

enjoyment of life, and other non-pecuniary losses. 

Case 0:22-cv-62286-BB Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/07/2022 Page 8 of 12
9

65. The conduct of Defendant was so willful, wanton, and in reckless disregard of the 

statutory rights of Plaintiff, as to entitle him to an award of punitive damages against Defendant, 

to deter it, and others, from such conduct in the future. 

66. Plaintiff is entitled to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees and litigation expenses 

pursuant to section 760.11(5), Florida Statutes. 

67. Plaintiff has no plain, adequate or complete remedy at law for the actions of 

Defendant, which have caused, and continue to cause, irreparable harm. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests a judgment in his favor and against Defendant for his 

actual and compensatory damages, including, but not limited to, front pay, back pay, emotional 

distress damages, and punitive damages, as well as his costs and attorneys’ fees, declaratory and 

injunctive relief, and such other and further relief as is deemed proper by this Court. 

COUNT IV 

RETALIATION UNDER THE ADA BASED ON DISABILITY

 

68. Plaintiff reincorporates and readopts all allegations contained within Paragraphs 1 

through 41, and 47, above. 

69. Plaintiff was terminated within close temporal proximity of his requests for 

reasonable accommodations based on his disability. 

70. Plaintiff’s requests for accommodations constituted protected activity under the 

ADA. 

71. Plaintiff was terminated as a direct result of his requests for reasonable 

accommodations. 

72. Plaintiff’s requests for reasonable accommodation, and his termination, are 

causally related. 

73. Defendant’s stated reasons for Plaintiff’s termination are a pretext. 

Case 0:22-cv-62286-BB Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/07/2022 Page 9 of 12
10

74. The conduct of Defendant and its agents and employees proximately, directly, and 

foreseeably injured Plaintiff, including, but not limited to, lost wages and benefits, future pecuniary 

losses, emotional pain and suffering, humiliation, inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of 

enjoyment of life, and other non-pecuniary losses. 

The conduct of Defendant was so willful and wanton, and in such reckless disregard of the 

statutory rights of Plaintiff, as to entitle him to an award of punitive damages against Defendant, 

to deter it and others from such conduct in the future. 

75. Plaintiff is entitled to recover reasonable attorneys’ fees and litigation expenses 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 12205. 

76. Plaintiff has no plain, adequate, or complete remedy at law for the actions of 

Defendant which have caused, and continue to cause, irreparable harm. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests a judgment in his favor and against Defendant for his 

actual and compensatory damages, including, but not limited to, front pay, back pay, emotional 

distress damages, and punitive damages, as well as his costs and attorneys’ fees, declaratory and 

injunctive relief, and such other and further relief as is deemed proper by this Court. 

COUNT V 

RETALIATION UNDER THE FLORIDA CIVIL RIGHTS ACT 

BASED ON DISABILITY 

77. Plaintiff reincorporates and readopts all allegations contained within Paragraphs 1 

through 41, and 47, above. 

78. Plaintiff was terminated within close temporal proximity of his requests for 

reasonable accommodations based on his disability. 

79. Plaintiff’s requests for accommodations constituted protected activity under the 

FCRA. 

Case 0:22-cv-62286-BB Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/07/2022 Page 10 of 12
11

80. Plaintiff was terminated as a direct result of his requests for reasonable 

accommodations. 

81. Plaintiff’s requests for reasonable accommodation, and his termination, are 

causally related. 

82. Defendant’s stated reasons for Plaintiff’s termination are a pretext. 

83. The conduct of Defendant and its agents and employees proximately, directly, and 

foreseeably injured Plaintiff, including, but not limited to, lost wages and benefits, future pecuniary 

losses, emotional pain and suffering, humiliation, inconvenience, mental anguish, loss of 

enjoyment of life, and other non-pecuniary losses. 

84. The conduct of Defendant was so willful and wanton, and in such reckless disregard 

of the statutory rights of Plaintiff, as to entitle him to an award of punitive damages against 

Defendant, to deter it and others from such conduct in the future. 

85. Plaintiff is entitled to recover his reasonable attorneys’ fees and litigation expenses 

pursuant to Section 760.11(5), Florida Statutes. 

86. Plaintiff has no plain, adequate, or complete remedy at law for the actions of 

Defendant which have caused, and continue to cause, irreparable harm. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests a judgment in his favor and against Defendant for his 

actual and compensatory damages, including, but not limited to, front pay, back pay, emotional 

distress damages, and punitive damages, as well as his costs and attorneys’ fees, declaratory and 

injunctive relief, and such other and further relief as is deemed proper by this Court. 

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

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

Case 0:22-cv-62286-BB Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/07/2022 Page 11 of 12
12

Dated this 7th day of December, 2022. 

 Respectfully submitted, 

 /s Noah E. Storch___

Noah E. Storch, Esq.

Florida Bar No. 0085476

Email: noah@floridaovertimelawyer.com

RICHARD CELLER LEGAL, P.A.

 10368 W. SR 84, Suite 103 

 Davie, Florida 33324 

 Telephone: (866) 344-9243 

 Facsimile: (954) 337-2771 

 

 Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Case 0:22-cv-62286-BB Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/07/2022 Page 12 of 12