`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT COURT OF MARYLAND
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`ROBERT JOHNSON,
`
`
`
`
`
`FERRARO FOODS, INC. and
`FERRARO FOODS OF MARYLAND, LLC,
`
`
`
`CIVIL ACTION NO.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`Plaintiff Robert Johnson files this Complaint against Defendants Ferraro Foods, Inc. and
`
`Ferraro Foods of Maryland, LLC (collectively referred to as “Ferraro Foods”), seeking relief for
`
`the discrimination he was subjected to and the unlawful termination of his employment by
`
`Ferraro Foods.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff Robert Johnson is an adult individual who resides in Johnstown,
`
`Pennsylvania.
`
`2.
`
`Defendant Ferraro Foods, Inc. is a New Jersey corporation which operates in
`
`Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, and North Carolina. Ferraro Foods,
`
`Inc.’s principal place of business is located at 287 South Randolphville Rd, Piscataway, New
`
`Jersey 08854, and that location also serves as the headquarters for Ferraro Foods.
`
`3.
`
`Defendant Ferraro Foods of Maryland, LLC is a Delaware corporation with its
`
`principal place of business located at 1501 Perryman Road, Suite 150, Aberdeen, Maryland
`
`21001.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-02966-GLR Document 1 Filed 11/18/21 Page 2 of 11
`
`4.
`
`At all relevant times, Ferraro Foods continuously employed more than 15
`
`employees and was a covered employer as defined by the Americans with Disabilities Act
`
`(“ADA” – 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq.) and the Maryland Fair Employment Practices Act
`
`(“FEPA” – Md. Code Ann., State Gov't §§ 20-601 et seq.).
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`5.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
`
`1331 in that Plaintiff’s claims arise under the laws of the United States and Plaintiff seeks redress
`
`for violations of federal laws. The Court has supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining claims
`
`pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367, because such claims are so closely related to Plaintiff’s federal
`
`claims that they form part of the same case or controversy.
`
`6.
`
`Venue is proper in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(a) and (b)(2) as a
`
`substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to Plaintiff’s claims occurred in this
`
`district.
`
`FACTUAL BACKGROUND
`
`7.
`
`Ferraro Foods is a specialty foodservice distributor that primarily serves the
`
`Italian restaurant and pizzeria segment in the Eastern United States.
`
`8.
`
`Ferraro Foods is headquartered in Piscataway, New Jersey, and has approximately
`
`8,000 customers who are located in 23 states throughout the country. To meet its distribution
`
`needs, Ferraro Foods has established regional operations in Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, New
`
`York, and North Carolina.
`
`9.
`
`Each of these regional outposts are wholly owned subsidiaries of Ferraro Foods,
`
`Inc. The following is a list of the regional outposts that Ferraro Foods currently owns and
`
`operates: Ferraro Foods of Connecticut, LLC; Ferraro Foods of Florida, LLC; Ferraro Foods of
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-02966-GLR Document 1 Filed 11/18/21 Page 3 of 11
`
`Maryland, LLC; Ferraro Foods of Maryland South, LLC; Ferraro Foods of New Jersey, LLC;
`
`Ferraro Foods of New York East, LLC; Ferraro Foods of New York, LLC; Ferraro Foods of New
`
`York North, LLC; and Ferraro Foods of North Carolina, LLC. (“Regional Outposts”)
`
`10.
`
`Although Ferraro Foods, Inc. and its Regional Outposts operate under distinct
`
`corporation names, all of Ferraro Foods’ operations, which include the day-to-day operations at
`
`the Regional Outposts, are controlled by the company’s headquarters in Piscataway, New Jersey.
`
`11.
`
`Each of the Regional Outposts are unilaterally dependent upon Ferraro Foods,
`
`Inc. Because of the nature of this parent-subsidiary relationship, Ferraro Foods, Inc., and all its
`
`Regional Outposts, which includes Ferraro Foods of Maryland, LLC, act as joint employers for
`
`the following reasons
`
`The C-suite executives for Ferraro Foods, Inc. (“Ferraro Foods’ Executives”),
`which includes the President, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer,
`Chief Financial Officer, and Chief Information Officer, are all located at and work
`from Ferraro Foods’ headquarters in Piscataway, New Jersey;
`
`Ferraro Foods’ Executives have direct control and authority over the day-to-day
`operations at all the Regional Outposts;
`
`Ferraro Foods’ Executives have exclusive control over the allocation of
`workplace resources at the Regional Outposts, which includes funding and
`allocation of personnel;
`
`Ferraro Foods’ Executives have control and authority over the marketing and
`business strategy at all the Regional Outposts;
`
`Ferraro Foods’ Executives have final decision-making authority over the hiring
`and firing of all personnel at the Regional Outposts; and
`
`All of Ferraro Foods’ human resources functions are controlled from and located
`at Ferraro Foods’ headquarters in Piscataway, New Jersey.
`
`
`a.
`
`
`b.
`
`
`c.
`
`
`d.
`
`
`e.
`
`
`f.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-02966-GLR Document 1 Filed 11/18/21 Page 4 of 11
`
`12.
`
`On July 31, 2019, Johnson was offered the position of Vice President of
`
`Operations by Ferraro Foods. This position would be responsible for the company’s operations in
`
`Connecticut, Maryland, and North Carolina. In addition, Johnson would be expected to assist
`
`with the company’s operations in New Jersey.
`
`13.
`
`Johnson would primarily work from the company’s location in Aberdeen,
`
`Maryland, but would report directly to Ferraro Foods’ President and Chief Operating Officer,
`
`Thomas Recine.
`
`14.
`
`As part of his job offer, Johnson was provided use of vacation days, sick days,
`
`and other fringe benefits including short-term and long-term disability leave. In addition, after
`
`one year of employment, Johnson would be eligible to participate in the company’s 401k plan.
`
`15.
`
`On August 6, 2019, Johnson began his employment with Ferraro Foods.
`
`16.
`
`The first 8 months of Johnson’s employment were largely successful, and the
`
`feedback Johnson received about his performance was encouraging and pointed to a long-term
`
`future with the company.
`
`17.
`
`Throughout Johnson’s employment with Ferraro Foods, he was dealing with a
`
`disability related to his spleen. Johnson would experience frequent pain in his abdominal area,
`
`but he managed this condition without issue and never missed a day of work.
`
`18.
`
`Things, however, changed quickly, beginning on April 6, 2020. On that day,
`
`Johnson suffered a ruptured spleen while working from the office and was transported to the
`
`hospital by ambulance.
`
`19.
`
`Johnson was in the hospital for 10 days and was treated for a variety of issues in
`
`his abdominal area. Throughout his time at the hospital, Johnson kept Ferraro Foods apprised of
`
`the status of his medical situation.
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-02966-GLR Document 1 Filed 11/18/21 Page 5 of 11
`
`20.
`
`Upon his release from the hospital on April 16, 2020, Johnson was not medically
`
`cleared to return to work.
`
`21.
`
`Johnson immediately informed Ferraro Foods’ Human Resources Director (“HR
`
`Director”) that he was not permitted to return to work by his doctor. Johnson also informed the
`
`HR Director that he would have a follow-up appointment with his doctor in a few weeks to
`
`determine if he needed additional medical treatment or would be cleared to return to work.
`
`22.
`
`Johnson also notified Ferraro Foods’ HR Director that he was now dealing with
`
`multiple health issues in his abdominal area, and that he would be managing these conditions for
`
`the foreseeable future. Johnson detailed to the HR Director the manner in which these ongoing
`
`health conditions substantially impacted major activities in his life.
`
`23.
`
`Johnson asked Ferraro Foods’ HR Director if he was permitted to use his short-
`
`term or long-term disability leave benefits while he was not working. The HR Director
`
`discouraged Johnson from using any of his disability-leave benefits and told Johnson that he was
`
`not permitted to use his disability-leave benefits unless he took a minimum of 6 weeks off.
`
`24.
`
`After Johnson informed Ferraro Foods that he would be unable to return to work
`
`for a few weeks, the company began searching for his replacement.
`
`25.
`
`Ferraro Foods attempted to conceal its attempts to replace Johnson by searching
`
`for candidates to fill a position that was called Director of Corporate Operations.
`
`26.
`
`Ferraro Foods told prospective candidates for the Director of Corporate
`
`Operations position to keep everything quiet because they would be replacing an individual who
`
`was currently employed with the company as a senior-level operations executive. At least one of
`
`the prospective candidates was able to confirm that he would be replacing Johnson if he was
`
`hired for the Director of Corporate Operations position.
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-02966-GLR Document 1 Filed 11/18/21 Page 6 of 11
`
`27.
`
`Upon information and belief, the essential job duties of the Director of Corporate
`
`Operations position were the same as the essential job duties of Johnson’s position of Vice
`
`President of Operations.
`
`28.
`
`In late April 2020, Johnson was medically cleared to return to work by his doctor.
`
`29.
`
`On May 5, 2020, Johnson returned to work and discovered that many of his job
`
`duties had been permanently reassigned to other employees and that his role with the company
`
`had been effectively marginalized.
`
`30.
`
`At all relevant times, Johnson was able to perform all the essential duties of his
`
`job. Johnson’s only limitation was a lifting restriction, and Johnson informed Ferraro Foods of
`
`this restriction and the need for a reasonable accommodation to manage that issue.
`
`31.
`
`Johnson spoke to Ferraro Foods’ President and COO, Thomas Recine, about the
`
`reassignment of his job duties and questioned why it was happening. Recine simply stated that
`
`“if I had known you were dealing with these health issues, I wouldn’t have hired you to begin
`
`with.”
`
`32.
`
`Soon after, Ferraro Foods began to blame Johnson for a series of issues which
`
`were occurring at Ferraro Foods’ Maryland location. Many of these alleged issues involved
`
`matters over which Johnson had no control or authority.
`
`33.
`
`For example, when Johnson attempted to address alleged issues involving
`
`adequate staffing at Ferraro Foods’ Maryland location, he discovered that he no longer had the
`
`authority or resources to properly resolve this issue as Ferraro Foods prevented him from hiring
`
`new employees at a rate that was competitive in the local market. Other alleged issues involved
`
`troublesome employees who Johnson no longer had the authority to manage or discipline. Even
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-02966-GLR Document 1 Filed 11/18/21 Page 7 of 11
`
`though Ferraro Foods was aware of Johnson’s reduced job responsibilities, Johnson was still
`
`being blamed for issues that were under the purview and control of different managers.
`
`34.
`
`On July 14, 2020, Johnson’s employment with Ferraro Foods was terminated.
`
`Johnson was informed that he was being fired because he was not meeting the requirements of
`
`his position. When Johnson pressed for further details, Ferraro Foods’ representatives refused to
`
`provide any additional explanation.
`
`35.
`
`Soon after, Johnson learned that he was being replaced by a younger employee
`
`who was not dealing with any health-related issues.
`
`36.
`
`Upon information and belief, Ferraro Foods made the decision to replace Johnson
`
`weeks before July 14, 2020 and began training his replacement without Johnson’s knowledge.
`
`37.
`
`The stated reasons for the termination of Johnson’s employment were pretext. It is
`
`believed that Johnson’s firing was part of a pattern and practice of behavior by Ferraro Foods in
`
`which disabled individuals are targeted, marginalized, and eventually removed from the
`
`company so that the company will not have to provide accommodations and other disability-
`
`related benefits as required by federal and state laws.
`
`38.
`
`It is believed that Ferraro Foods acted willfully and in reckless disregard of
`
`Johnson’s rights under federal and state laws when it fired him because they failed to engage in
`
`the interactive process, refused to provide reasonable accommodations for his disabilities, and/or
`
`believed that due to his disabilities, Johnson was or would be unable to perform the essential
`
`functions of his job.
`
`39.
`
`Johnson, however, was able to perform the essential functions of his job at all
`
`relevant times.
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-02966-GLR Document 1 Filed 11/18/21 Page 8 of 11
`
`40.
`
`As a result of Ferraro Foods’ discrimination, Johnson has suffered and will
`
`continue to suffer a substantial loss of earnings, including, but not limited to, loss of salary,
`
`benefits, health insurance, and other emoluments of employment.
`
`41.
`
`As a further direct and proximate cause of Ferraro Foods’ discrimination,
`
`Johnson’s reputation and career have been damaged.
`
`42.
`
`On December 10, 2020, Johnson filed a Charge of Discrimination against Ferraro
`
`Foods.
`
`43.
`
`Johnson’s Charge was dual-filed with the Maryland Commission on Civil Rights.
`
`44.
`
`By letter dated September 16, 2021, the EEOC notified Johnson of his right to file
`
`a civil action against Ferraro Foods.
`
`45.
`
`Johnson has initiated this civil action within 90 days of receiving the EEOC’s
`
`Right to Sue letter.
`
`46.
`
`For all applicable claims, Johnson has exhausted his administrative remedies
`
`under federal and Maryland law.
`
`STATEMENT OF CLAIMS
`
`COUNT I
`Violations of the ADA
`(Johnson v. Ferraro Foods)
`
`Johnson incorporates by reference the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 46, as
`
`47.
`
`if fully set forth herein.
`
`48.
`
`Johnson is a disabled individual as defined by the ADA.
`
`49.
`
`Ferraro Foods was aware of Johnson’s disabilities and still fired Johnson because
`
`of his physical or mental impairments; his perceived physical or mental impairments; and/or due
`
`to his record of impairments.
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-02966-GLR Document 1 Filed 11/18/21 Page 9 of 11
`
`50.
`
`The acts and omissions by Ferraro Foods that are described in this Complaint
`
`constitute unlawful discrimination, failure to accommodate, and retaliation under the ADA.
`
`51.
`
`As a proximate result of Ferraro Foods’ conduct, Johnson has or will suffer
`
`substantial harm, for which Johnson seeks general, compensatory, consequential, and punitive
`
`damages.
`
`COUNT II
`Violations of the FEPA
`(Johnson v. Ferraro Foods)
`
`Johnson incorporates by reference the allegations in Paragraphs 1 through 51, as
`
`52.
`
`if fully set forth herein.
`
`53.
`
`Johnson is a disabled individual as defined by the FEPA.
`
`54.
`
`Ferraro Foods was aware of Johnson’s disabilities and still fired Johnson because
`
`of his physical or mental impairments; his perceived physical or mental impairments; and/or due
`
`to his record of impairments.
`
`55.
`
`The acts and omissions by Ferraro Foods that are described in this Complaint
`
`constitute unlawful discrimination, failure to accommodate, and retaliation under the FEPA.
`
`56.
`
`As a proximate result of Ferraro Foods’ conduct, Johnson has or will suffer
`
`substantial harm, for which Johnson seeks general, compensatory, consequential, and punitive
`
`damages.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-02966-GLR Document 1 Filed 11/18/21 Page 10 of 11
`
`REQUESTS FOR RELIEF
`
`Accordingly, Johnson requests that this Court enter judgment on his behalf and enter an
`
`order directing the award of other relief, as follows:
`
`A.
`
`Finding that Ferraro Foods violated the ADA;
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`Finding that Ferraro Foods violated the FEPA;
`
`Awarding Plaintiff back pay, front pay, lost benefits, and other emoluments of
`
`employment and such other relief as is necessary to make him whole;
`
`D.
`
`Awarding Plaintiff compensatory damages for pain, humiliation, emotional
`
`distress, and damage to reputation;
`
`E.
`
`F.
`
`G
`
`Awarding Plaintiff punitive damages under the ADA and the FEPA;
`
`Awarding Plaintiff attorneys’ fees and costs;
`
`Awarding Plaintiff pre- and post-judgment interest as provided by law; and
`
`H.
`
`Awarding Plaintiff any other relief to which he is entitled and/or which this Court
`
`deems necessary and proper.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`Case 1:21-cv-02966-GLR Document 1 Filed 11/18/21 Page 11 of 11
`
`A jury trial is demanded for all claims triable by jury
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`/s/ Sammy Y. Sugiura
`Sammy Y. Sugiura
`Bar No. 21828
`ssugiura@cohengrace.com
`Mark A. Grace
`Bar No. 21814
`mgrace@cohengrace.com
`COHEN & GRACE, LLC
`105 BRAUNLICH DRIVE
`SUITE 300
`PITTSBURGH, PA 15237
`TELEPHONE: (412) 847-0300
`FACSIMILE: (412) 847-0304
`
`COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF
`
`
`11
`
`