Limo Drivers' Wage Lawsuit Moves Forward, Gets Remanded to State Court
A federal judge issued a ruling Friday stating that a wage lawsuit against West Haven-based Hy's Livery Service Inc. limo company will be remanded to New Haven Superior Court. Plaintiffs seek award of at least $1 million in damages.
June 17, 2019 at 12:59 PM
3 minute read
A federal judge has remanded a prospective putative class action for unpaid wages filed against a West Haven-based limousine company to state court, and ordered attorney fees be paid to the plaintiff counsel.
In his 13-page ruling letting the lawsuit proceed to New Haven Superior Court, Judge Warren Eginton said plaintiff lawyers from The Hayber Law Firm were entitled to $8,380 in attorney fees.
At issue is a lawsuit filed in federal court in January 2018 against Hy's Livery Service Inc. on behalf of about 300 past and present chauffeurs. The lawsuit alleged the employees were required to work during meal breaks, although the time for those meal breaks was deducted from their wages. Michael Petela Jr., one of the two attorneys from The Hayber Law Firm representing the plaintiffs, told the Connecticut Law Tribune Monday he was seeking damages “in the seven figures.”
The plaintiffs sued, citing unpaid wages under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and the Connecticut Minimum Wage Act, a state claim. Eight months after filing the federal suit, there was a ruling in a separate case, Munoz Gonzalez v. D.L.C. Limousine Service, which expanded the Fair Labor Standards Act's taxicab exemption to cover limo companies such as Hy's Livery Service. This led the plaintiffs to file a motion to voluntarily dismiss the FLSA claim with prejudice, and have the case remanded to state court. The defense objected and wanted to keep the case in federal court. Eginton's ruling means the case will be remanded and attorney fees awarded.
“They attempted to proceed in federal court knowing there was no subject-matter jurisdiction, Petela said. “I think a lot of their motivation was to delay and increase litigation costs on both sides.”
Representing the livery service are attorneys Adam Lyke, Glen Duhl and Hugh Cuthbertson, all with New Haven-based Zangari Cohn Cuthbertson Duhl & Grello. Cuthbertson referred all comment to Duhl, who along with Lyke, did not respond by press time.
In court papers, the defense maintained “no defendant willfully deprived any person of any wages to which he or she may have been entitled” and wrote that employees “have been paid all wages and premiums due to them for their hours worked during their employment.”
But Petela said his clients will now forge ahead to seek class certification.
The lawsuit covers limousine drivers who worked for the livery service from Jan. 3, 2016, to the present. It alleges the drivers, who were paid the state's $10.10 an hour minimum wage or a little above and tips, were not supposed to work during their food breaks unless they were completely relieved of duty.
“During their lunch breaks they remained on call and were working actively,” Petela said. “They were not supposed to be working, as this time was deducted from their wages.”
The lawsuit lists three plaintiffs: current drivers Hormoz Akhundzadeh and Daniel Dziekan and former employee Mehdi Belgada.
“This is not an industrywide issue, but specific to this livery service,” Petela said.
Assisting Petela is attorney Richard Hayber.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPharmacies Accuse GoodRx of 'Inviting Price-Fixing' in Series of Antitrust Class Actions
4 minute readProgressive Hit With Class Action After Allegedly Unlawfully Denying Collision Coverage
3 minute read$2.8B Antitrust Settlement Will Have Long-Term Impacts on Insurance Industry, Say Attorneys Behind Accord
'Substantive Deficiencies': Judge Grants Big Law Motion Dismissing Ivy League Price-Fixing Claims
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1US Magistrate Judge Embry Kidd Confirmed to 11th Circuit
- 2Shaq Signs $11 Million Settlement to Resolve Astrals Investor Claims
- 3McCormick Consolidates Two Tesla Chancery Cases
- 4Amazon, SpaceX Press Constitutional Challenges to NLRB at 5th Circuit
- 5Schools Win Again: Social Media Fails to Strike Public Nuisance Claims
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250