Jones v. All The Little Things Count, LLC.
Filing
13
OPINION on Dismissal. Jones's claims will be dismissed with prejudice. (Signed by Judge Lynn N. Hughes) Parties notified. (ghassan, 4)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
Nicole Marie Jones,
Plaintiff,
'Versus
All the Little Things Count, LLC.,
Defendant.
January 06, 2016
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
David J. Bradley, Clerk
Opinion on Dismissal
I.
On October 9, 2.oI5,]ones applied to proceed as pauper and represented that she was
pro se. Unbeknownst to the court, Jones had received substantial assistance in
preparing her complaint from an attorney. The court granted her application and then
summarily dismissed her claims. Jones's "newly appearing" attorney then moved for
reconsideration. The court vacated its dismissal to give Jones the opportunity to be
heard by (a) amending her complaint, and
(b) setting a conference. After a conference
that lasted over one hour,]ones has been heard - thrice. She has substantiated none of
her causes of action against All The Little Things Count, liC.
2..
FromJuly I 7, 2.008, until MarchI 7, 2.0 I 5, Nicole Marie Jones worked for Little Things
as a home-care provider for patients who receive Medicaid benefits. Starting in 2.009,
J ones worked exclusively with one severely autistic client. She says she developed a
close relationship with him and his family. The mother of the client was the
commissioner of a sports league and, eventually,]ones officiated for it for pay. She says
that the family never complained about her job performance.
3.
Starting in 2.0n, Little Things Count did not always pay Jones promptly for all of her
services because she billed more hours than her Medicaid classification permitted - she
was a full-time employee, and Medicaid would only pay for forty hours of care per week.
If she demanded payment for more than forty hours, the company would have to cover
the price of the non-billable hours for the patient. Jones, after the first request for
payment for non-billable hours, contacted the chief operating officer of Little Things,
Sandra Graves. The company promptly paid her. In February lOI4, she again demanded
payment for 14 to l6 non-billable hours. She was not promptly paid.
4.
On March
II, lOI 5, Jones
told Shamar Fletcher, the Consumer Services Director at
Little Things, that if she was not paid for her extra hours she would complain to the
Department of Labor. She also arranged with the client to take time off to complain; she
did not tell Little Things of the arrangement. On March
16, lOI5,
she did not report
to work. On March 17, she was fired for cause.
Jones spends several pages in her amended complaint and spent a great deal of time at
the conference asserting that she was not always paid on time; however, she concedes
that she was paid - in full- for the hours she worked while employed by LittleThings.
5.
In a lengthy termination memorandum, Little Things explained thatJ ones was fired for:
(a) repeatedly violating protocol by arranging for times off from work without notifying
it to ensure a replacement was available;
(b) working more hours than insured by her
patient's Medicaid plan; and (c) complaints about her ability to compassionately,
responsibly, and safely care for patients in accord with its policies and the rules and
guideline of the Department ofAging and Disability Services. As part of her termination
settlement, it acquiesced her demands for additional pay and paid her for the nonbillable twenty-six hours and for her last week of work.
6
She says that Little Things may have fired her because she knew that it and the
client were defrauding medicaid. When asked to identify specific facts to support these
claims, she had no answer. When asked when she reported the fraud, she said she had
not. Jones should exercise more caution when accusing others of fraud.
7.
She also says that Little Things may have fired her because she complained about not
being paid for the non-billable hours. It did not retaliate against her; it fired her the day
after she did not show up for work. It fired her not because it did not want to pay what
she was owed, it fired her because she refused to conform to the billing scheme
prescribed by Medicare, her inability to follow company procedure, and legitimate
-2-
concerns about the quality of care she provided.
7.
Jones's claims will be dismissed with prejudice.
Signed on January 5,
20I6,
at Houston, Texas.
~ynn N'~gh4t'--------United States DistrictJudge
-3-
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?