Williams v. Merle Pharmacy Inc, 1:15-cv-01262

Background

Plaintiff Rhonda S. Williams worked for Merle Pharmacy/Central Illinois Medical/William Martin from Nov. 2004 to July 29, 2014 and was an hourly employee who alleges unpaid overtime and recordkeeping/paystub deficiencies.
Plaintiff alleges defendants failed to provide paystub/itemized payroll information and failed to keep accurate time and vacation records.
Plaintiff disclosed to an elderly customer (and to the State’s Attorney) that the pharmacy was billing the customer directly rather than her insurer and raised concerns the customer was being financially exploited; she was terminated shortly after defendant Martin returned from travel.
Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint asserts FLSA (Counts I–II), IMWL (Counts III–IV), IWPCA (Counts V–VI), Illinois common-law retaliatory discharge (Count VII), Illinois Whistleblower Act (Count VIII), and Illinois Adult Protective Services Act (APSA) (Count IX) claims.
Defendants moved to dismiss Counts II, V, VI, VII, VIII, and IX under Rule 12(b)(6); the court resolved which statutory torts permit private causes of action and which retaliation theories were sufficiently pled.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Count II — FLSA recordkeeping violation (private right)	Williams contends FLSA recordkeeping violations support a claim.	Defendants assert no private cause of action exists for FLSA recordkeeping failures.	Dismissed with prejudice — no private cause of action for FLSA recordkeeping.
Count V — IWPCA failure to provide itemized payroll info	Williams seeks relief under IWPCA for missing itemized pay information.	Defendants argue only the Dept. of Labor enforces those provisions; no private right for itemized-info violations.	Dismissed with prejudice — court finds no private cause of action for failure to provide itemized payroll info under IWPCA.
Count IV — IMWL recordkeeping violation	Williams alleges IMWL recordkeeping violations.	Defendants did not move on this count, but court considered authority that IMWL recordkeeping claims lack private remedy.	Dismissed sua sponte with prejudice — no private cause of action for IMWL recordkeeping failures.
Count VII — Common-law retaliatory discharge (whistleblowing)	Williams says she was fired for reporting suspected financial exploitation (whistleblowing).	Defendants contend allegations fail to show protected public-policy violation or criminality and lack plausible basis.	Dismissed with prejudice — plaintiff failed to plead a plausible good-faith basis that defendants’ conduct violated public policy or was criminal.
Count VIII — Illinois Whistleblower Act (IWA)	Williams alleges she was prohibited from reporting and was terminated for refusing to engage in illegal activity.	Defendants argue alleged conduct does not fall within IWA protections.	Dismissed with prejudice — statutory causes exist but complaint lacks factual allegations that she was prohibited from reporting or asked to commit illegality.
Count IX — APSA retaliation for reporting financial exploitation	Williams alleges she reported suspected exploitation to the State’s Attorney (and Dept. of Aging) and was terminated in retaliation.	Defendants argue plaintiff is not a mandated reporter and thus not protected.	Survives dismissal — APSA protects any employee who makes a good-faith report or will be a witness; plaintiff alleged pre-termination report to State’s Attorney and thus Count IX remains.

Key Cases Cited

Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (plausibility pleading standard)
Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (pleading must state a plausible claim)
AnchorBank, FSB v. Hofer, 649 F.3d 610 (view facts in plaintiff’s favor on 12(b)(6))
Indep. Trust Corp. v. Stewart Info. Servs. Corp., 665 F.3d 930 (plausibility and discovery expectation)
Palmateer v. Int’l Harvester Co., 421 N.E.2d 876 (Ill. 1981) (retaliatory discharge/whistleblowing public-policy exception)
Bourbon v. Kmart Corp., 223 F.3d 469 (7th Cir.) (good-faith basis for reporting required)
Aponte v. Nat’l Steel Serv. Ctr., 500 F. Supp. 198 (N.D. Ill.) (IWPCA private action discussion)