1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

Chelsea Schmalenberg,

12763 Tradd St.

Carmel, IN 46032

Plaintiff,

v.

Dysphagia Management Systems, LLC and 

Carol Winchester,

5681 Bentgrass Dr. #104 

Sarasota, FL 34235

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 1:18-CV-99

Judge 

PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT

WITH JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff Chelsea Schmalenberg, brings this action against Dysphagia Management 

Systems, LLC and Carol Winchester for their violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Ohio 

Minimum Fair Wage Standards (Ohio Revised Code §4111.01 et seq.) (“OWS”), and Ohio Rev. 

Code §4113.15.

Background

1. Plaintiff worked as a traveling speech pathologist performing endoscopies at 

various locations in her area. Plaintiff now seeks to recover unpaid minimum and overtime wages, 

pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and the OWS.

Jurisdiction and Venue

2. Venue is proper in this district because, during the time-period entailed by her 

claims, Defendants employed Plaintiff within the Federal District of Southern Ohio.

3. This district has personal jurisdiction over this matter because Defendants engaged 

in tortious acts or omissions within this district, and have otherwise made or established contacts 

within this district sufficient to permit the exercise of personal jurisdiction.

Case: 1:18-cv-00099-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/12/18 Page: 1 of 6 PAGEID #: 1
2

4. The Court has jurisdiction over this case pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) and 28 

U.S.C. § 1331. The Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s state law claims pursuant 

to 28 U.S.C. § 1367.

Parties

5. Plaintiff was employed with Defendants from approximately March 3, 2016 to 

October 28, 2016. Plaintiff worked as a traveling speech language pathologist.

6. Defendant DMS is an LLC organized in the state of Florida which maintains 

business operations in multiple states, including, at all times relevant to the Complaint, Ohio.

7. Defendant Carol Winchester owns, manages, and operates the Defendant entity.

8. At all times relevant to the Complaint, Plaintiff was an “employee” within the 

meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 203(e)(1) and Ohio Rev. Code §4111.03(D(3), and Defendants were a 

“person” and “employer” within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 203 and Ohio Rev. Code §

4111.03(D)(2), and an “individual” and “corporation” under Ohio Rev. Code §4113.15(A). 

Facts

9. Plaintiff worked as a traveling speech pathologist for the Defendants. 

10. Plaintiff was paid hourly at the rate of $40/hour for straight-time work (under 40 

hours in a week).

11. After accepting Defendants’ offer of employment, Plaintiff was sent through 

mandatory training in Florida, totaling 80 hours.

12. Plaintiff was not paid for this training time, nor was Plaintiff compensated for travel 

time to or from the training.

13. When Plaintiff started work in Ohio, she was given assignments to travel to various 

locations in her geographic area to perform endoscopies on patients.

Case: 1:18-cv-00099-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/12/18 Page: 2 of 6 PAGEID #: 2
3

14. She would also draft summaries and reports based upon the endoscopies and submit 

them to the Defendant company so that they can be evaluated, processed, and provided to the client 

for whom the endoscopy was performed (the clients are typically medical service providers who 

needed the endoscopy to be performed on the patient, the patient was typically not the client 

themselves.)

15. Plaintiff was also required to have regular phone conversations and conference calls 

with the owner Carol Winchester as well as the other pathologists and managers.

16. A typical day for Plaintiff would involve her leaving her house in the morning to 

attend the first endoscopy at a remote location, and she would then travel to each subsequent 

scheduled endoscopy before traveling home at the end of the day.

17. At all times while she is traveling she would be expected to be available and 

participate in conference calls with Defendants. Plaintiff also made and received calls to and from 

clients and the employer while driving.

18. Additionally, after returning home at the end of the day, Plaintiff would spend 

anywhere between 10-20 minutes completing administrative tasks in connection with her job, such 

as submitting any reports that had not yet been submitted, submitting her time spent on the day,

and responding to emails and other phone calls.

19. Plaintiff’s understanding from the Defendants is that the time spent performing this 

administrative work at the end of the day could not be included in the weekly hours of work 

reported to the employer. Because of this, Plaintiff did not report the time spend performing 

administrative tasks within her total hours of worked each week.

20. The Defendants had a practice of automatically deducting one hour of reported

work time from each day’s total prior to issuing payment to Plaintiff.

Case: 1:18-cv-00099-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/12/18 Page: 3 of 6 PAGEID #: 3
4

21. Not including the time that was deducted by Defendants each week, and not 

including time spent performing administrative tasks at the end of each day, Plaintiff typically 

worked between 30 and 40 hours each week while located in Ohio.

22. Plaintiff was never paid at the overtime rate ($60/hour) for work performed beyond 

40 hours in a workweek.

Enterprise Status

23. During all relevant times, Defendant company constituted an “enterprise” as that 

term is defined in the FLSA because they performed related activities (either through unified 

operation or common control) for a common business purpose.

24. During the relevant times, the Defendant company collectively engaged in well 

over $500,000 in annual revenue.

25. During the relevant times, Defendant company transacted business and performed 

services across state lines.

COUNT I – FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT

26. Plaintiff incorporates all prior allegations as if fully stated herein.

27. Defendants employed Plaintiff.

28. Plaintiff was not an exempt employee as defined by the FLSA and relevant 

regulations.

29. Defendants did not pay Plaintiff for all time worked, including time spent training.

30. Defendants never paid Plaintiff one-and-a-half times her regular hourly rate for 

hours worked in excess of 40 in a workweek.

31. Defendants’ violations of the FLSA were willful.

Case: 1:18-cv-00099-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/12/18 Page: 4 of 6 PAGEID #: 4
5

COUNT II – VIOLATION OF THE OHIO MINIMUM FAIR WAGE STANDARDS AND 

SEMI-MONTHLY PAYMENT OF WAGES

32. Plaintiff incorporates all prior allegations as if fully stated herein.

33. Defendants employed Plaintiff.

34. Defendants did not pay Plaintiff for all time worked, including time spent training 

at the beginning of her employment.

35. Defendants never paid Plaintiff one-and-a-half times her regular hourly rate for 

hours worked in excess of forty in a workweek.

36. Defendants’ violations were knowing and willful.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff asks the Court to enter judgment against Defendants and issue an 

order:

a. Declaring that Defendants’ conduct violated the FLSA and Ohio law;

b. Awarding Plaintiff all damages incurred as a result of the breach to make her whole;

c. Entering judgment in the amount of all unpaid wages, straight-time and overtime 

due and owing to the Plaintiff as well as all applicable liquidated damages;

d. Awarding Plaintiff her reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs of this action; 

e. Awarding pre-judgment and post-judgment interest on all monetary amounts 

awarded in this action; and

f. Awarding such other and further relief as this Court deems appropriate and just.

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff demands trial by jury on all issues as to which a jury trial is available.

Case: 1:18-cv-00099-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/12/18 Page: 5 of 6 PAGEID #: 5
6

RespectfullySubmitted,

/s/ Cori R. Besse 

Cori R. Besse (0081447)

Adam V. Sadlowski (0079582)

cbesse@sb-lawyers.com

asadlowski@sb-lawyers.com

SADLOWSKI & BESSE LLC

11427 Reed Hartman Highway, Suite 217

Blue Ash, Ohio 45241

Telephone: 513.618.6596

Fax: 513.618.6442

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Case: 1:18-cv-00099-TSB Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/12/18 Page: 6 of 6 PAGEID #: 6