Case 2:21-cv-03255 Document 1 Filed 07/21/21 Page 1 of 7
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
`---------------------------------------------------------------
`TAUHEDAH CRYOR
`
`
`
`:
`6715 Trinity Street
`
`
`
`
`:
`Philadelphia, PA 19142
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY
`
`:
`HOSPITAL
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`111 S. 11th Street
`
`
`
`
`:
`Philadelphia, PA 19107
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`:
`---------------------------------------------------------------
`COMPLAINT – CIVIL ACTION
`
`Civil Action No.:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`Plaintiff, Tauhedah Cryor (“Plaintiff”), by and through her undersigned attorney, for her
`
`Complaint against Thomas Jefferson University Hospital (“Defendant”), alleges as follows:
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff brings this action to redress violations by the Defendant of the Family and
`
`Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”), 29 U.S.C. § 2601, et seq., and ultimately terminated her from
`
`employment in retaliation for her attempts to exercise those rights in violation of the same. As a
`
`result, Plaintiff has suffered damages set forth herein.
`
`PARTIES
`
`2.
`
`Plaintiff Tauhedah Cryor is a citizen of the United States and Pennsylvania, and
`
`currently maintains a residence at 6715 Trinity Street, Philadelphia, PA 19142.
`
`3.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Thomas Jefferson University Hospital is,
`
`upon information and belief, a non-profit corporation organized and existing under the laws of the
`
`Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and maintains a principal place of business located at 111 S. 11th
`
`Street, Philadelphia, PA 19107.
`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
`---------------------------------------------------------------
`TAUHEDAH CRYOR
`
`
`
`:
`6715 Trinity Street
`
`
`
`
`:
`Philadelphia, PA 19142
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY
`
`:
`HOSPITAL
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`111 S. 11th Street
`
`
`
`
`:
`Philadelphia, PA 19107
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`:
`---------------------------------------------------------------
`COMPLAINT – CIVIL ACTION
`
`Civil Action No.:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`Plaintiff, Tauhedah Cryor (“Plaintiff”), by and through her undersigned attorney, for her
`
`Complaint against Thomas Jefferson University Hospital (“Defendant”), alleges as follows:
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff brings this action to redress violations by the Defendant of the Family and
`
`Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”), 29 U.S.C. § 2601, et seq., and ultimately terminated her from
`
`employment in retaliation for her attempts to exercise those rights in violation of the same. As a
`
`result, Plaintiff has suffered damages set forth herein.
`
`PARTIES
`
`2.
`
`Plaintiff Tauhedah Cryor is a citizen of the United States and Pennsylvania, and
`
`currently maintains a residence at 6715 Trinity Street, Philadelphia, PA 19142.
`
`3.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant Thomas Jefferson University Hospital is,
`
`upon information and belief, a non-profit corporation organized and existing under the laws of the
`
`Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and maintains a principal place of business located at 111 S. 11th
`
`Street, Philadelphia, PA 19107.
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-03255 Document 1 Filed 07/21/21 Page 2 of 7
`
`4.
`
`At all times relevant hereto, Defendant acted or failed to act through its agents,
`
`servants, and/or employees thereto existing, each of whom acted at all times relevant hereto in the
`
`course and scope of their employment with and for Defendant.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`5.
`
`Plaintiff filed the instant action within the statutory time frame applicable to her
`
`claims.
`
`6.
`
`This is an action authorized and instituted pursuant the Family and Medical Leave
`
`Act (“FMLA”), 29 U.S.C. § 2601, et seq.
`
`7.
`
`This Court also has federal question jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28
`
`U.S.C. §§ 1331.
`
`8.
`
`The venue in this district is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), as the
`
`Defendant resides in this judicial district, doing business therein, and the unlawful practices of
`
`which Plaintiff is complaining were committed in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
`
`FACTUAL BACKGROUND
`
`9.
`
`Paragraphs 1 through 8 are hereby incorporated by reference as though the same
`
`were fully set forth at length herein.
`
`10.
`
`On or about December 10, 2018, Defendant hired Plaintiff in the position Patient
`
`Access IV.
`
`11.
`
`Subsequently, on or about March 1, 2020, Defendant transferred Plaintiff to another
`
`department where she continued in the position of Patient Access IV.
`
`12.
`
`At all times material hereto, Plaintiff received positive performance reviews,
`
`occasional praise, and no significant discipline.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-03255 Document 1 Filed 07/21/21 Page 3 of 7
`
`13.
`
`By way of background, in or around early October 2020, Plaintiff started
`
`experiencing intermittent symptoms similar to those experience COVID-19.
`
`14.
`
`Due to her symptoms, Plaintiff was allowed to work from home and occasionally
`
`took sick leave when she was too ill to work.
`
`15.
`
`On or about October 30, 2020, Plaintiff went to see her doctor and, as a result of
`
`the symptoms she was experiencing, was tested for COVID-19.
`
`16.
`
`The next day, Plaintiff received her test results that she was positive for COVID-
`
`19.
`
`17. When Defendant was notified of Plaintiff’s positive COVID-19 test result,
`
`Defendant told Plaintiff she did not have to work due to COVID-19, but that her job would not be
`
`secure or held as a result.
`
`18.
`
`Despite Plaintiff being employed with Defendant for more than one year and
`
`Defendant having more than fifty (50) employees within a seventy-five (75) mile radius of
`
`Plaintiff’s worksite, Defendant never informed Plaintiff of her right to FMLA leave.
`
`19.
`
`Instead, Defendant told Plaintiff she would be required to use her paid vacation and
`
`sick days or take unpaid time off and, if she did take time off, her position would not be guaranteed.
`
`20.
`
`Plaintiff subsequently used vacation and sick time after her diagnosis and was
`
`planning to complete FMLA paperwork on her own during that time.
`
`21.
`
`In or around early November 2020, Plaintiff used vacation days already previously
`
`scheduled and approved to continue her recovery.
`
`22.
`
`On or about November 11, 2020, Plaintiff called, texted, and emailed Defendant
`
`that she would be unable to come into work due to still experiencing Covid-19 symptoms -
`
`specifically chills and shortness of breath.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-03255 Document 1 Filed 07/21/21 Page 4 of 7
`
`23.
`
`On or about November 11, 2020, Defendant terminated Plaintiff’s employment by
`
`phone stating Plaintiff called out sick on a day that was not approved.
`
`24.
`
`Notably, Defendant never once offered or mentioned Plaintiff’s right to protected
`
`medical leave under the FMLA.
`
`25.
`
`It is believed and therefore averred that Defendant willfully violated the provisions
`
`of the FMLA by interfering with Plaintiff’s right to protected medical leave, and ultimately
`
`terminated Plaintiff from employment in retaliation for her attempt to exercise her rights under
`
`same, in violation of the FMLA.
`
`26.
`
`As a result of Defendant’s deliberate, willful, malicious, and unlawful actions,
`
`Plaintiff has suffered damages, including, but not limited to, loss of employment, promotions,
`
`benefits, earnings and earnings potential, loss of potential benefits, and other economic damages,
`
`and has also suffered mental anguish, emotional pain and suffering, emotional distress,
`
`humiliation, and damage to reputation.
`
`COUNT I
`THE FAMILY AND MEDICAL LEAVE ACT
`29 U.S.C. § 2601, et seq.
`INTERFERENCE AND RETALIATION
`
`Paragraphs 1 through 26 are hereby incorporated by reference as though the same
`
`27.
`
`were fully set forth at length herein.
`
`28.
`
`Defendant employed at least fifty (50) employees at its various office locations
`
`within the applicable seventy-five (75) mile radius of Plaintiff’s worksite for each working day
`
`in each of twenty (20) or more calendar days in the current or preceding year.
`
`29.
`
`Plaintiff was an eligible employee under the FMLA and entitled up to twelve (12)
`
`weeks of unpaid leave for her serious health condition.
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-03255 Document 1 Filed 07/21/21 Page 5 of 7
`
`30.
`
`Defendant interfered with Plaintiff’s rights under the FMLA by failing to provide
`
`her with the requisite twelve (12) weeks of available FMLA leave.
`
`31.
`
`Defendant willfully violated the FMLA by: (a) interfering with Plaintiff’s rights to
`
`protected leave under the FMLA; and (b) terminating Plaintiff from employment in retaliation for
`
`her attempts at exercising her right to protected leave to seek and/or receive treatment for her
`
`serious health condition.
`
`32.
`
`Defendant willfully violated the FMLA by failing to inform Plaintiff of her rights
`
`to protected leave under the FMLA.
`
`33.
`
`The aforementioned actions of Defendant constitute interference and retaliation
`
`under the FMLA.
`
`34.
`
`35.
`
`As a result of Defendant’s actions, Plaintiff has suffered significant damages.
`
`Plaintiff has, because of Defendant’s wrongful termination of Plaintiff’s
`
`employment, suffered loss of employment, promotion benefits, earnings and earnings potential,
`
`other significant benefits, emotional pain and suffering, emotional distress and humiliation.
`
`WHEREFORE, as a result of the unlawful conduct of Defendant, Plaintiff respectfully
`
`request that this Court enter judgment in her favor and against Defendant, and grant her the
`
`maximum relief allowed by law, including, but not limited to:
`
`A.
`
`Back wages, front pay, and bonuses in an amount to be determined at trial, but not
`
`less than one hundred and fifty thousand dollars ($150,000.00);
`
`Liquidated damages;
`
`Plaintiff’s costs, disbursements and attorneys’ fees incurred in prosecuting this
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`action;
`
`D.
`
`Pre-judgment interest in an appropriate amount; and
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-03255 Document 1 Filed 07/21/21 Page 6 of 7
`
`E.
`
`F.
`
`Such other and further relief as is just and equitable under the circumstances.
`
`Any verdict in favor of Plaintiff is to be molded by the Court to maximize the
`
`financial recovery available to Plaintiff in light of the caps on certain damages as set forth by
`
`applicable law.
`
`JURY DEMAND
`
`Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury as to all issues so triable.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`MURPHY LAW GROUP, LLC
`
`
`
`
`
`
` By: /s/ Michael Murphy
`
`Michael Murphy, Esq.
`
`Eight Penn Center, Suite 2000
`
`1628 John F. Kennedy Blvd.
`
`Philadelphia, PA 19103
`
`TEL: 267-273-1054
`
`FAX: 215-525-0210
`
`murphy@phillyemploymentlawyer.com
`Attorney for Plaintiff
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: July 21, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 2:21-cv-03255 Document 1 Filed 07/21/21 Page 7 of 7
`
`
`
`DEMAND TO PRESERVE EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`The Defendant is hereby demanded to preserve all physical and electronic information
`
`pertaining in any way to Plaintiff’s employment, to Plaintiff’s potential claims and her claims to
`
`damages, to any defenses to same, including, but not limited to, electronic data storage,
`
`employment files, files, memos, job descriptions, text messages, e-mails, spreadsheets, images,
`
`cache memory, payroll records, paystubs, time records, timesheets, and any other information
`
`and/or data which may be relevant to any claim or defense in this litigation.
`
`
`
`7
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
