IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

Samantha Miller

1535 Red Lead Lane

Columbus, Ohio 43223

 

 Plaintiff,

v.

Sequel Pomegranate Health Systems, LLC

c/o Corporation Service Company

50 W. Broad St., Suite 1330

Columbus, Ohio 43215

-andSequel Youth and Family Services

1131 Eagletree Lane

Huntsville, Alabama 35801

 

Defendants.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Civil Action No. 2:17-cv-1035

JUDGE 

MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Jury Demand Endorsed Hereon

COMPLAINT

NOW COMES Plaintiff Samantha Miller (“Plaintiff” or “Miller”) for her complaint 

against Defendant Sequel Pomegranate Health Systems, LLC (“Defendant SPHS”) and 

Defendant Sequel Youth and Family Services (“Defendant SYFS”) (collectively Defendant 

SPHS and Defendant SYFS will be referred to as “Defendants”), hereby states as follows:

I. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. This action is brought seeking all available relief under the Fair Labor Standards 

Act of 1938 (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 201, et seq., the Ohio Minimum Fair Wage Standards Act, 

O.R.C. 4111.03, and 4111.08 (“the Ohio Wage Act”); and the Ohio Prompt Pay Act (“OPPA”), 

Ohio Rev. Code § 4113.15 (the Ohio Wage Act and the OPPA will be referred to collectively as 

“the Ohio Acts”), and 28 U.S.C. §1331. 

Case: 2:17-cv-01035-ALM-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 1 of 13 PAGEID #: 1
2

2. This Court’s jurisdiction in this matter is also predicated upon 28 U.S.C. §1367 as 

this Complaint raises additional claims pursuant to the laws of Ohio, over which this Court 

maintains supplemental subject matter jurisdiction. 

3. Venue is proper in this forum pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391, because Plaintiff 

entered into an employment relationship with Defendants in the Southern District of Ohio and 

Defendants have done substantial business in the Southern District of Ohio. 

II. NATURE OF THIS ACTION 

4. This lawsuit seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation for Plaintiff during 

the course of her employment with Defendants.

5. Plaintiff began her employment as a receptionist in or around May 2016. At all 

times during her employment, Plaintiff performed non-exempt duties and was paid on an hourly 

basis.

6. As a receptionist, Plaintiff performed non-exempt duties including administrative 

tasks, greeting visitors, answering and transferring incoming calls, mailing bills, preparing 

outgoing mail, sorting incoming mail, and other tasks.

7. In addition to her regular receptionist responsibilities, Defendants assigned 

Plaintiff to teach dance and workout classes on the weekends beginning in October 2016 and 

continuing through May 2017.1 During her employment, Plaintiff was not compensated for any 

time she spent teaching the dance and workout classes even though she repeatedly requested 

payment. Consequently, Plaintiff refused to continue providing classes for Defendants in or 

around late May 2017.

8. In or around January 2017, Plaintiff was offered and accepted the position of 

Scheduling Coordinator.

 

1 Plaintiff was unable to teach classes from approximately February 2017 until March 2017.

Case: 2:17-cv-01035-ALM-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 2 of 13 PAGEID #: 2
3

9. As Scheduling Coordinator, Plaintiff was responsible for scheduling Defendants’ 

staff. 

10. In addition to working as Scheduling Coordinator, Plaintiff was also responsible 

for attending to the transportation needs of the adolescents in Defendants’ care. Consequently, 

Plaintiff was on call at all times because she was responsible for receiving and making calls 

necessary to fulfill the transportation needs of the adolescents in Defendants’ care. 

11. Plaintiff regularly received and made calls regarding the transportation needs of 

adolescents in Defendants’ care outside of regular business hours. Plaintiff was not provided

with a work telephone to receive and make such calls, but instead used her personal cellphone.

Plaintiff was not compensated for any time spent performing the transportation responsibilities 

outside of normal business hours.2

12. Defendants own and operate a treatment and acute care facility located at 765

Pierce Dr., Columbus, Ohio 43223 for adolescents with mental health, behavioral health, or other 

needs.

13. At all times relevant, Defendants employed Plaintiff to perform non-exempt 

duties. 

14. At all times relevant, Defendants failed to compensate Plaintiff for the time she 

spent teaching dance and workout classes. In addition, Defendants failed to compensate Plaintiff 

for the time she spent coordinating transportation for adolescents in Defendants’ care outside of 

normal business hours. 

15. Plaintiff’s primary duties do not fall under any of the exemptions under federal or 

state overtime laws. 

 

2 Upon information and belief, Defendants’ drivers were compensated $1.25 per hour to remain available for their

on-call hours, as well as their regular hourly rate if they were needed for transportation.

Case: 2:17-cv-01035-ALM-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 3 of 13 PAGEID #: 3
4

16. Defendants regularly required Plaintiff to work in excess of forty (40) hours per 

week. However, Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff for the time she spent teaching dance and 

workout classes and the time she spent coordinating transportation for adolescents in 

Defendants’ care outside of normal business hours.

17. By the conduct described in this Complaint, Defendants have violated the FLSA 

by failing to pay Plaintiff overtime wages she earned and to which she is entitled by law. 

III. PARTIES

18. Plaintiff is an individual, a United States Citizen, and a resident of the State of 

Ohio. 

19. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff was an employee of Defendants as defined 

in the FLSA, the Ohio Acts, and Ohio Constitution Art. 2 §34a.

20. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff was a covered, non-exempt employee of 

Defendants who, pursuant to Section 7 of the FLSA, was required to receive not less than one 

and one-half times her regular rate of pay for hours worked in excess of forty (40) hours.

21. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff was entitled to receive not less than one and 

one-half times her regular rate of pay for hours worked in excess of forty (40) hours. 

22. Defendant SPHS is a limited liability company registered to do business in the 

State of Ohio with its principal place of business in the Southern District of Ohio. 

23. Defendant SYFS is a foreign for-profit company with its principal place of 

business in Alabama. 

24. Defendants are and have been, jointly and individually, “employers” as that term 

is defined by the FLSA, the Ohio Acts, and Ohio Constitution Art. 2 §34a.

Case: 2:17-cv-01035-ALM-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 4 of 13 PAGEID #: 4
5

25. During relevant times, Defendants have mutually benefitted from the work 

performed by Plaintiff. 

26. During relevant times, Defendants have not acted entirely independently of each 

other and have not been completely disassociated with respect to Plaintiff. 

27. During relevant times, Defendants shared the services of Plaintiff. 

28. During relevant times, Defendants acted directly or indirectly in the interest of 

each other in relation to Plaintiff. 

29. Defendants are actively doing business in this judicial district and are jointly an 

“employer” as that term is defined by the FLSA and the Ohio Acts.

30. During relevant times, Defendants maintained control, oversight, and direction 

over Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees, including the promulgation and 

enforcement of policies affecting the payment of wages, including overtime compensation.

31. During relevant times, Defendants benefitted from the work performed by 

Plaintiff.

32. Upon information and belief, Defendants operate and control an enterprise and 

employ employees engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce, or have 

had employees handling, selling, or otherwise working on goods or materials that have been 

moved in or produced for commerce by any person; and Defendants have had an annual gross 

volume of sales made or business done of not less than $500,000 per year (exclusive of excise 

taxes at the retail level).

33. During relevant times, Defendants have been involved in the employment 

decisions of Plaintiff, including, but not limited to, decisions about Defendants’ wage and hour 

policies and practices that affect Plaintiff.

Case: 2:17-cv-01035-ALM-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 5 of 13 PAGEID #: 5
6

34. During relevant times, Defendants suffered and permitted Plaintiff to work more 

than forty (40) hours per workweek, while not compensating her for all such hours worked over 

forty (40) at a rate of at least one and one-half times her regular rate of pay. 

35. Upon information and belief, Defendants, at all times relevant hereto, were fully 

aware of the fact that they were legally required to comply with the wage and overtime payment 

laws of the United States and of the State of Ohio, as well as recordkeeping laws of the State of 

Ohio. 

36. During relevant times, Defendants had knowledge of and acted willfully in regard

to their conduct described herein.

37. Defendants are in possession and control of necessary documents and information 

from which Plaintiff would be able to precisely calculate damages or Defendants failed to 

maintain such records despite their obligations under Ohio law.

IV. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

38. As part of their regular business practice, Defendants have intentionally, willfully, 

and repeatedly engaged in a pattern, practice, and/or policy of violating the FLSA with respect to 

Plaintiff. This policy and pattern or practice includes, but is not limited to Defendants failure to 

compensate Plaintiff for the time she spent teaching dance and workout classes and their failure 

to compensate Plaintiff for the time she spent coordinating transportation for adolescents in 

Defendants’ care outside of normal business hours. 

39. Throughout her employment with Defendants, Plaintiff regularly worked more 

than 40 hours per week.

Case: 2:17-cv-01035-ALM-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 6 of 13 PAGEID #: 6
7

40. Defendants were aware that Plaintiff worked more than 40 hours per workweek, 

yet Defendants failed to pay her overtime compensation for certain hours worked over 40 in a 

workweek.

41. Plaintiff’s primary duty was not management. 

42. Plaintiff’s primary duties were non-exempt duties, as described in this Complaint.

43. Plaintiff did not have the discretion or authority to make any decisions with 

respect to matters of significance and were required to follow the policies, practices, and 

procedures set by Defendants.

44. Defendants paid Plaintiff on an hourly basis and not on a salary basis.

45. At all times during her employment, Defendants classified Plaintiff as non-exempt.

46. Plaintiff was not exempt from receiving FLSA overtime benefits because, inter 

alia, she was not “executive,” “administrative,” or “professional” employees, as those terms are 

defined under the FLSA. See 29 C.F.R. §§ 541.0, et seq.

47. Plaintiff was not exempt from receiving FLSA overtime benefits because, inter 

alia, she was not a “learned professional”, as that term is defined under the FLSA. See 29 CFR § 

541.301. 

V. CAUSES OF ACTION 

FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

FLSA –UNPAID OVERTIME

48. All of the preceding paragraphs are realleged as if fully rewritten herein.

49. Defendants engaged in a pattern and practice of violating the FLSA, as described 

in this Complaint.

50. At all relevant times, Plaintiff was engaged in commerce and/or the production of 

goods for commerce within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. §§ 206(a) and 207(a). 

Case: 2:17-cv-01035-ALM-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 7 of 13 PAGEID #: 7
8

51. The overtime wage provisions set forth in §§ 201 et seq. of the FLSA apply to 

Defendants. 

52. Defendants are employers engaged in commerce and/or the production of goods 

for commerce within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. §§ 206(a) and 207(a).

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

§§ 203(e) and 207(a).

54. At all relevant times, the job duties of Plaintiff primarily consisted of non-exempt 

duties.

55. Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff certain overtime wages to which she is entitled 

under the FLSA because Defendants failed to compensate Plaintiff for the time she spent 

teaching dance and workout classes and further failed to compensate Plaintiff for the time she 

spent coordinating transportation for adolescents in Defendants’ care outside of normal business 

hours. 

56. Plaintiff regularly worked in excess of forty (40) hours per week.

57. Plaintiff should have been paid the overtime premium for hours worked in excess 

of forty (40) hours per week, but she was not compensated for all hours spent working.

58. Defendants’ violations of the FLSA, as described in this Complaint, have been 

willful and intentional. Defendants have failed to make a good faith effort to comply with the 

FLSA with respect to their compensation of Plaintiff. 

59. As a result of Defendants’ willful violations of the FLSA, Plaintiff has suffered 

damages by being denied overtime wages in accordance with 29 U.S.C. §§ 201, et seq. 

60. As a result of the unlawful acts of Defendants, Plaintiff has been deprived of 

overtime compensation and other wages in amounts to be determined at trial, and is entitled to 

Case: 2:17-cv-01035-ALM-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 8 of 13 PAGEID #: 8
9

recovery of such amounts, liquidated damages, prejudgment interest, attorneys’ fees, costs and 

other compensation pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b). 

SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

R.C. 4111.03 – UNPAID OVERTIME

61. All of the preceding paragraphs are realleged as if fully rewritten herein

62. This claim is brought under Ohio Law.

63. The Ohio Wage Act requires that covered employees be compensated for every 

hour worked in a workweek. See O.R.C. §§ 4111 et seq., See also, 29 U.S.C §206(b)

64. The Ohio Wage Act requires that employees receive overtime compensation “not 

less than one and one-half times” the employee’s regular rate of pay for all hours worked over 40 

in one workweek, “in the manner and methods provided in and subject to the exemptions of 

section 7 and section 13 of the "Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. See O.R. C. § 4111.03 (A), 

See also, 29 U.S.C. § 207 (a)(1)

65. Plaintiff was a covered employee entitled to the Ohio Wage Act’s protections

66. Plaintiff was not exempt from receiving Ohio Wage Act overtime benefits 

because Plaintiff was not exempt “executive,” “administrative,” or “professional” employees, as 

those terms are defined under the FLSA. See O.R.C. 4111.03(A), See also 29 C.F.R. §§ 541.0, 

et seq.

67. Plaintiff was not exempt from receiving FLSA overtime benefits because, inter 

alia, Plaintiff was not a “learned professional” employee, as that term is defined under the FLSA. 

See 29 CFR §541.301. 

68. Defendants are covered employers required to comply with the Ohio Wage Act’s 

mandates. 

Case: 2:17-cv-01035-ALM-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 9 of 13 PAGEID #: 9
10

69. Defendants violated the Ohio Wage Act with respect to Plaintiff by failing to 

compensate her at the rate of one and one-half times her regular rate of pay for all hours worked 

in excess of forty (40) hours in a workweek. 

70. In violating the Ohio Wage Act, Defendants acted willfully and with reckless 

disregard of clearly applicable Ohio Wage Act provisions.

71. For Defendants’ violations of the Ohio Wage Act, Plaintiff has suffered damages.

Plaintiff seeks unpaid overtime and other compensation, liquidated damages, interest and 

attorneys’ fees, and all other remedies available. 

THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

R.C. 4113.15 —OPPA VIOLATION

72. All of the preceding paragraphs are realleged as if fully rewritten herein.

73. During relevant times, Defendants were covered by the OPPA and Plaintiff was

employed by Defendants within the meaning of the OPPA.

74. The OPPA requires Defendants to pay Plaintiff all wages, including unpaid 

overtime, on or before the first day of each month, for wages earned by her during the first half 

of the preceding month ending with the fifteenth day thereof, and on or before the fifteenth 

day of each month, for wages earned by her during the last half of the preceding calendar 

month. See O.R.C. § 4113.15(A).

75. During relevant times, Plaintiff was not paid all wages, including overtime wages 

at one and one-half times her regular rate within thirty (30) days of performing the work. See

O.R.C. § 4113.15(B). 

76. Plaintiff’s unpaid wages remain unpaid for more than thirty (30) days beyond the

regularly scheduled payday.

Case: 2:17-cv-01035-ALM-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 10 of 13 PAGEID #: 10
11

77. In violating the OPPA, Defendants acted willfully, without a good faith basis and 

with reckless disregard of clearly applicable Ohio law, and their actions entitle Plaintiff to 

liquidated damages in the amount of six percent of the amount of the unpaid overtime 

compensation owed or two hundred dollars, whichever is greater.

FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION

RECORDKEEPING VIOLATIONS OF THE OHIO WAGE ACT

78. All of the preceding paragraphs are realleged as if fully rewritten herein.

79. The Ohio Wage Act requires employers to maintain and preserve payroll or 

other records containing, among other things, the hours worked each workday and the total 

hours worked each workweek. See O.R.C. § 4111.08. See also, 29 C.F.R. §§ 516.2 et seq.

80. During all times material to this complaint, Defendants were covered 

employers, and were required to comply with the Ohio Wage Act’s mandates.

81. Plaintiff was a covered employee entitled to the protection of the Ohio Wage 

Act.

82. During times material to this complaint, Defendants violated the Ohio Wage 

Act with respect to Plaintiff by failing to properly maintain accurate records of all hours 

Plaintiff worked each workday and within each workweek.

83. In violating the Ohio Wage Act, Defendants acted willfully and with reckless 

disregard of clearly applicable Ohio Wage Act provisions.

VI. PRAYER FOR RELIEF 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests judgment against the Defendants for an Order: 

A. Finding that Defendants have failed to keep accurate records in accordance with 

the FLSA and Ohio law, Plaintiff is entitled to prove her hours worked with reasonable 

estimates;

Case: 2:17-cv-01035-ALM-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 11 of 13 PAGEID #: 11
12

B. Awarding Plaintiff unpaid compensation, including overtime wages as to be 

determined at trial together with any liquidated damages allowed by the FLSA;

C. Awarding Plaintiff unpaid compensation, including overtime wages as to be 

determined at trial together with any liquidated damages allowed by the Ohio Acts;

D. Awarding Plaintiff costs and disbursements and reasonable allowances for fees of 

counsel and experts, and reimbursement of expenses;

E. Awarding Plaintiff such other and further relief as the Court deems just and 

proper;

F. Issuing an injunction prohibiting Defendants from engaging in present, ongoing 

and future violations of the FLSA and the Ohio Acts;

G. Granting Plaintiff leave to amend to file additional claims for relief or different 

causes of action should information become available through investigation and discovery; and 

H. Rendering a judgment against Defendants for all damage, relief, or any other 

recovery whatsoever.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Matthew J.P. Coffman

Matthew J.P. Coffman (0085586)

COFFMAN LEGAL, LLC

1457 S. High St. 

Columbus, Ohio 43207

Phone: 614-949-1181

Fax: 614-386-9964

Email: mcoffman@mcoffmanlegal.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Case: 2:17-cv-01035-ALM-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 12 of 13 PAGEID #: 12
13

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff requests a trial by a jury of eight (8) persons.

/s/ Matthew J.P. Coffman

Matthew J.P. Coffman 

Case: 2:17-cv-01035-ALM-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 13 of 13 PAGEID #: 13