Complaint Against Sofidel America Corp. with Jury Demand Filed by Michael Forrester. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Cover Sheet, # 2 Proposed Summons)(Wenzel, Steven)

Document #1 Filed 03/30/2026 · 22 pages · District Court, M.D. Florida · View original PDF

INTRODUCTION

1This action has been initiated by Michael Forrester (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff”) against Sofidel America Corp. (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant”) for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA" -42 USC §§ 12101 et. seq.), the Family and Medical Leave Act (“FMLA” - 29 U.S.C. §§ 2601 et seq.), the Florida Civil Rights Act, and Florida Statutes (Fla. Stat. § 440.205 (1979)). As a direct consequence of Defendant’s unlawful actions, Plaintiff seeks damages as set forth herein.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2This Court, in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 1331, has jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s claims because this civil action arises under laws of the United States.

3This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff's state-law claim(s) because such claim(s) arise out of the same common nucleus of operative facts as his federal claims asserted herein.

This Court may properly maintain personal jurisdiction over Defendant because Defendant’s contacts with this state and this judicial district are sufficient for the exercise of jurisdiction over Defendant to comply with traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice, satisfying the standard set forth by the United States Supreme Court in International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310 (1945) and its progeny.

4Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1) and (b)(2), venue is properly laid in this district because all of the acts and/or omissions giving rise to the claims set forth herein occurred in this judicial district, and in addition, Defendant is deemed to reside where it is subject to personal jurisdiction, rendering Defendant a resident of the Middle District of Florida.

5Plaintiff is proceeding herein under ADA and has properly exhausted his administrative remedies with respect to such claims by timely filing a Charge of Discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) and by filing the instant lawsuit within ninety (90) days of receiving a notice of dismissal and/or right to sue letter from the EEOC.

PARTIES

6The foregoing paragraphs are incorporated herein in their entirety as if set forth in full.

7Plaintiff is an adult individual who resides in Hillsborough County, Florida.

8Defendant is a tissue paper manufacturer headquartered in Horsham, PA with several plants throughout the United States, including the plant at which Plaintiff worked in Haines City, Polk County, Florida.

9At all times relevant herein, Defendant acted by and through its agents, servants and employees, each of whom acted at all times relevant herein in the course and scope of their employment with and for Defendant.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

10The foregoing paragraphs are incorporated herein in their entirety as if set forth in full.

11Plaintiff was hired by Defendant on or about April 30, 2018.

12For the first approximate five (5) years of Plaintiff’s employment with Defendant, he was employed at Defendant’s Ohio plant as the Security and Gate House Supervisor.

13As the Security and Gate House Supervisor, Plaintiff eventually started to perform some of the job responsibilities for which a Facility Manager would be responsible.

14Because of his stellar work performance, loyalty to Defendant, and his integrity, Plaintiff was promoted into the role of Facility Manager in June of 2020.

15Plaintiff continued to perform very well in the role of Facility Manager and was even featured in Sofidel Magazine in 2022 for his team’s effort in Security and Housekeeping.

16In or about August of 2022, Plaintiff voluntarily transferred to Defendant’s Haines City, FL plant location, where he remained employed until his unlawful termination on or about July 1, 2025.

Plaintiff Suffers a Work-Related Injury and Develops Disabilities from the Same

17On or about October 25, 2023, Plaintiff injured his arm while performing work for Defendant and reported said injury to Defendant’s management on the same day.

18Plaintiff was sent for an x-ray by Defendant’s workers’ compensation panel physician and was told that he had tendonitis.

19Following his diagnosis of tendonitis, Plaintiff was scheduled for multiple physical therapy appointments with Defendant’s workers’ compensation panel physicians.

20After several months of physical therapy appointments, Plaintiff was still experiencing significant pain in his arm and as a result, was sent to occupational therapy under workers’ compensation.

21Because Plaintiff’s arm was not significantly improving, he requested a change of care in or about February of 2024.

22Per his request, Plaintiff was sent to a different workers’ compensation panel physician at Concentra, who notified him that he likely has nerve damage and needed to see an orthopedic doctor.

23After visiting the orthopedic doctor, Plaintiff was diagnosed with tendonitis, arthritis, and nerve damage.

II.

Plaintiff Requests Reasonable Accommodations for His Disabilities

24As a result of the foregoing diagnoses, Plaintiff was scheduled for two surgeries.

25Plaintiff notified Defendant of his surgery dates on or about March 8, 2024 and was scheduled to commence a medical leave of absence for the same on or about April 29, 2024.

26Unfortunately, Plaintiff’s aforesaid surgeries were postponed multiple times, due to Defendant’s workers’ compensation insurance carrier, Liberty Mutual.

27Despite his surgeries being postponed, Plaintiff started his medical leave of absence on or about April 29, 2024 and remained out of work because his conditions were getting worse and his doctor placed him under “TTD” (Temporary Total Disability).

28Plaintiff finally underwent both aforesaid surgeries in June of 2024.

29Plaintiff’s recovery from his aforesaid surgeries was very difficult, and it was not until December of 2024 that he was released to return to work with

Read the full filing

You’re reading pages 1–5 of 22. Register free to read the complete 22-page transcript on this page.

These are public U.S. federal court records, available free from PACER and the court. Registration unlocks our full on-page transcript — a convenience service.

Public U.S. federal court record (district court docket 73110449, document 1). Source via the RECAP Archive (Free Law Project). The same record is available from PACER. Informational only — not legal advice.