UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON 

TRUDY MORRIS, : Case No. 3:17-cv-318 

6834 Stillmore Drive : 

Englewood, Ohio 45322 : Judge ______________________ 

: 

 Plaintiff, : 

: 

v. : COMPLAINT WITH 

 : JURY DEMAND ENDORSED HEREON 

PINES PET CEMETERY, INC., : 

c/o C.T. Lawton : 

764 Riley Wills Road : 

Lebanon, Ohio 45036 : 

 : 

 Defendant. : 

PARTIES 

1. Plaintiff Trudy Morris is a citizen of the State of Ohio and a resident of 

Montgomery County, Ohio. 

2. Defendant Pines Pet Cemetery is corporation incorporated under the law of the 

State of Ohio and with its principal place of business in Ohio. 

JURISDICTION AND VENUE 

3. This Court has jurisdiction to hear this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 because 

it arises under the laws of the United States, including the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 

201, et seq., and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001, et 

seq.

4. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state law claims 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367 on the grounds that Plaintiff’s state law claims are so related to her 

Case: 3:17-cv-00318-TMR Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/13/17 Page: 1 of 10 PAGEID #: 1
2 

 

federal claims over which the Court has original jurisdiction that they form a part of the same 

case or controversy. 

5. Venue is proper in the Southern District of Ohio, Western Division, pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) because Plaintiff was employed in this Division and District and the 

unlawful conduct alleged in this Complaint has taken place within this Division and District. 

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS 

6. Plaintiff Trudy Morris began her employment with Defendant Pines Pet Cemetery 

on April 23, 2010, as a grief counselor. 

7. In this role, Plaintiff was supervised by Shannon Wood, who is also the owner of 

the cemetery. 

8. Defendant is a covered enterprise under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 

29 U.S.C. § 203, and a covered employer under Ohio Rev. Code § 4111.03. 

9. At all relevant times, Plaintiff’s position was non-exempt from earning overtime 

pay under the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 213, and R.C. § 4111.03. 

10. During her time in Defendant’s employ, Plaintiff was informed by Ms. Wood that 

Defendant pays normal hourly wages for any overtime hours worked, and does not pay time-anda-half. 

11. Between August 2014 and July 2017, Plaintiff worked 1087.97 hours of overtime. 

12. Defendant compensated Plaintiff’s overtime hours at the regular, non-overtime 

rate, paying these hours with a check separate from Plaintiff’s normal paycheck. 

13. Between August 2014 and July 2017, Plaintiff accrued 287 hours of unpaid 

regular time by working through lunch. 

Case: 3:17-cv-00318-TMR Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/13/17 Page: 2 of 10 PAGEID #: 2
3 

 

14. Defendant did not compensate Plaintiff for this time work, instead deducting two 

hours each week from Plaintiff’s paycheck. 

15. Plaintiff participated in a 401(k) defined contribution plan with Defendant. 

16. As the 401(k) plan’s sponsor, Defendant is a fiduciary with respect to the plan. 

17. Under the plan’s terms, Defendant was to make employer contributions. 

18. Over the course of Plaintiff’s employment, Defendant withheld 14 months of 

contributions to Plaintiff’s 401(k) plan totaling $254.90. 

19. Plaintiff self-terminated her employment on July 15, 2017. 

20. Following the end of her employment with Defendant, Plaintiff sought the advice 

of counsel to pursue potential wage and hour claims for unpaid normal and overtime wages and 

withheld 401(k) contributions. 

21. Plaintiff’s counsel sent a letter to Defendant on August 1, 2017, outlining 

Plaintiff’s potential claims. 

22. When Defendant received Plaintiff’s letter, Ms. Wood and Andrew Hatcher, 

Defendant’s Office Manager, sent Plaintiff a series of retaliatory, threatening, and hostile text 

messages. 

23. In response to Plaintiff’s letter, Mr. Hatcher texted Plaintiff, “I directly told you 

no over time and i have documentation have fun with this journey. Your [sic] a piece of shit!” 

24. Mr. Hatcher threatened further retaliation by texting Plaintiff, “Drop what you 

are attempting or severe legal consequences you will be faces [sic] with. Your [sic] a low life 

because of this. Wow I’m am [sic] absolutely astonished and I truly feel sorry for the person you 

are. Enjoy a very lonely life, god himself hates you,” “I’m embarrassed to have ever called you a 

friend or every [sic] gave you sympathy. You are a piece of garbage for what you are attempting. 

Case: 3:17-cv-00318-TMR Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/13/17 Page: 3 of 10 PAGEID #: 3
4 

 

Literally I’m ashamed of myself for ever being you [sic] friend,” “I hope when you look in the 

mirror you feel shame and embarrassment. People do the right thing to help you and you stab 

them in the back. You are worthless and pathetic women [sic] and an army is prepared to stop 

what you are attempting. You will have a funeral one day where you are alone l, [sic] alone in 

darkness is your future. Never have i witness [sic] someone so pathetic in my life and I hope you 

know you are a fucking piece of shit! Enjoy life and I now know why your husband hates you 

and why your son wants nothing to do with you. Enjoy old age alone you worthless person!” 

COUNT I 

(Non-Payment of Overtime – FLSA) 

25. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein by reference. 

26. At all relevant times, Defendant was an employer within the meaning of the 

FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 203(d). 

27. At all relevant times, Plaintiff was an employee within the meaning of the FLSA, 

29 U.S.C. § 203(e). 

28. Plaintiff’s position was not subject to the FLSA’s exemptions from overtime 

eligibility, 29 U.S.C. § 213. 

29. Defendant violated the FLSA’s overtime provision, 29 U.S.C. § 207(a)(1), by 

failing to compensate Plaintiff for the hours she worked in excess of 40 hours a week at a rate of 

one and one-half times her wage. 

30. Having told Plaintiff, “I directly told you no over time and i have documentation 

have fun with this journey. Your [sic] a piece of shit!,” and by placing her overtime hours on a 

separate check, Defendant violated the FLSA knowingly and willfully. 

Case: 3:17-cv-00318-TMR Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/13/17 Page: 4 of 10 PAGEID #: 4
5 

 

31. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff has been damaged and is entitled to 

relief, including liquidated damages, attorney’s fees, and costs pursuant to 29 U.S.C. §§ 216 and 

260. 

COUNT II 

(Non-Payment of Overtime - Ohio Rev. Code Ch. 4111) 

32. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein by reference. 

33. At all relevant times, Defendant was an employer within the meaning of R.C. § 

4111.03(D)(2). 

34. At all relevant times, Plaintiff was an employee within the meaning of R.C. § 

4111.03(D)(3). 

35. Plaintiff’s position was not subject to the statutory exemptions from overtime 

eligibility of R.C. § 4111.03, which incorporates the FLSA’s exemptions, 29 U.S.C. § 213. 

36. Defendant violated R.C. §§ 4111.03 and 4111.13 by failing to compensate 

Plaintiff for the hours she worked in excess of 40 hours a week at a rate of one and one-half 

times her wage. 

37. Having told Plaintiff, “I directly told you no over time and i have documentation 

have fun with this journey. Your [sic] a piece of shit!,” and by placing her overtime hours on a 

separate check, Defendant violated state law knowingly and willfully. 

38. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff has been damaged and is entitled to 

relief, including attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to R.C. § 4111.10. 

COUNT III 

(Non-Payment of Wages – FLSA) 

39. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein by reference. 

Case: 3:17-cv-00318-TMR Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/13/17 Page: 5 of 10 PAGEID #: 5
6 

 

40. At all relevant times, Plaintiff was an employee within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. 

§ 203(e). 

41. At all relevant times, Defendant was an employer within the meaning of 29 

U.S.C. § 203(d). 

42. By failing to pay Plaintiff for working through lunch and by deducting time from 

Plaintiff’s paycheck, Defendant knowingly and willfully violated the minimum wage provisions 

of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 206. 

43. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff has been damaged and is entitled to 

relief, including liquidated damages, attorney’s fees, and costs pursuant to 29 U.S.C. §§ 216 and 

260. 

COUNT IV 

(Non-Payment of Wages – Ohio Constitution, II.34A, Ohio Rev. Code Ch. 4111) 

44. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein by reference. 

45. At all relevant times, Plaintiff was an employee within the meaning of R.C. § 

4111.03(D)(3). 

46. At all relevant times, Defendant was an employer within the meaning of R.C. § 

4111.03(D)(2). 

47. By failing to pay Plaintiff for working through lunch and by deducting time from 

Plaintiff’s paycheck, Defendant knowingly and willfully violated Ohio’s minimum wage laws, 

including Article II, Section 34a of the Ohio Constitution, R.C. §§ 4111.02, 4111.13, and 

4113.15 (the Prompt Payment Act). 

48. As a result, Plaintiff has been damaged and is entitled to relief, including attorney 

fees and costs pursuant to R.C § 4111.10. 

Case: 3:17-cv-00318-TMR Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/13/17 Page: 6 of 10 PAGEID #: 6
7 

 

COUNT V 

(Wrongful Denial of Benefits – ERISA – 29 U.S.C § 1132(a)) 

49. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein by reference. 

50. Plaintiff participates in Defendant’s qualified trust organized under 26 U.S.C. § 

401(k), which is a defined contribution plan governed by the Employee Retirement Income 

Security Act (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001, et seq.

51. As the sponsor of the 401(k) plan, Defendant was a fiduciary of the plan. 

52. Defendant owed fiduciary duties to Plaintiff pursuant to ERISA § 404, 29 U.S.C. 

§ 1104, including the duty to act in accordance with the documents and instruments governing 

the plan, insofar as the terms are consistent with ERISA. 

53. The 401(k) plan’s terms stipulated that Defendant was to make contributions in 

proportion to the contributions of employees. 

54. Over the course of Plaintiff’s employment, Plaintiff made regular contributions to 

her 401(k) account. 

55. Defendant failed to contribute its amount corresponding to 14 months of 

Plaintiff’s contributions in accordance with the 401(k) terms. 

56. By failing to make contributions as required by the documents governing the 

401(k) plan, Defendant breached its fiduciary duty to Plaintiff and thereby violated ERISA, 29 

U.S.C. § 1109. 

57. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff has been damaged and is entitled to 

recover benefits due to her under the plan pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1132, as well as attorney fees 

and costs pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1132(g)(1) incurred by her efforts to enforce her contractual 

rights under the 401(k) plan. 

Case: 3:17-cv-00318-TMR Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/13/17 Page: 7 of 10 PAGEID #: 7
8 

 

COUNT VI 

(Retaliation – FLSA – 29 U.S.C. § 215(a)(3)) 

58. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein by reference. 

59. Plaintiff engaged in protected activity by opposing practices she reasonably 

believed to be unlawful, including seeking legal advice and informing Defendant through 

counsel that she intended to pursue her wage and hour claims. 

60. Defendant retaliated against Plaintiff for her protected activity by, including but 

not limited to, sending threatening and harassing text messages that read, “Drop what you are 

attempting or severe legal consequences you will be faces [sic] with. Your [sic] a low life 

because of this,” “You are a piece of garbage for what you are attempting,” and “an army is 

prepared to stop what you are attempting,” among others. 

61. Defendant’s retaliatory conduct violates 29 U.S.C. § 215(a)(3), which protects 

current and former employees from retaliation by current and former employers for pursuing 

FLSA claims. 

62. Defendant’s retaliation was knowing and willful. 

63. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff has been damaged and is entitled to 

relief, including liquidated damages, attorney’s fees, and costs pursuant to 29 U.S.C. §§ 216 and 

260. 

COUNT VII 

(Retaliation – Ohio Rev. Code Ch. 4111) 

64. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein by reference. 

Case: 3:17-cv-00318-TMR Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/13/17 Page: 8 of 10 PAGEID #: 8
9 

 

65. Plaintiff engaged in protected activity by opposing practices she reasonably 

believed to be unlawful, including seeking legal advice and informing Defendant through 

counsel that she intended to pursue her wage and hour claims. 

66. Defendant retaliated against Plaintiff for her protected activity by, including but 

not limited to, sending threatening and harassing text messages that read, “Drop what you are 

attempting or severe legal consequences you will be faces [sic] with. Your [sic] a low life 

because of this,” “You are a piece of garbage for what you are attempting,” and “an army is 

prepared to stop what you are attempting,” among others. 

67. Defendant’s retaliatory conduct violates R.C. § 4111.13, which protects former 

employees from retaliation by former employers in pursing wage and hour claims. 

68. Defendant’s retaliation was knowing and willful. 

69. As a direct and proximate result, Plaintiff has been injured and is entitled to 

judgment and compensation. 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Trudy Morris requests judgment against Defendant as follows: 

(a) That Plaintiff be awarded compensatory damages, including all unpaid wages and 

unpaid overtime; 

(b) That Plaintiff be awarded her unpaid 401(k) contributions pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 

1132; 

(c) That Plaintiff be awarded liquidated damages in an amount equal to her unpaid 

wages and overtime, pursuant to 29 U.S.C. §§ 216 and 260; 

(d) That Plaintiff be awarded punitive damages; 

(e) That Plaintiff be awarded pre-judgment and post-judgment interest; 

Case: 3:17-cv-00318-TMR Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/13/17 Page: 9 of 10 PAGEID #: 9
10 

 

(f) That Plaintiff be awarded reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, pursuant to 29 

U.S.C. § 216(b) (FLSA claims), 29 U.S.C. § 1132(g) (ERISA claim) and Ohio 

Rev. Code § 4111.10; 

(g) That Plaintiff be compensated for the adverse tax consequences of receiving a 

lump sum award rather than her compensation over several, separate tax years; 

and 

(h) That Plaintiff be awarded all other legal and equitable relief to which she may be 

entitled. 

Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Kelly Mulloy Myers 

Kelly Mulloy Myers (0065698) 

Trial Attorney for Plaintiff 

FREKING MYERS & REUL LLC 

600 Vine Street, 9th Floor 

Cincinnati, OH 45202 

PH: 513/721-1975 - FX: 513/651-2570 

kmyers@fmr.law 

JURY DEMAND

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

 /s/ Kelly Mulloy Myers 

 

Case: 3:17-cv-00318-TMR Doc #: 1 Filed: 09/13/17 Page: 10 of 10 PAGEID #: 10