Hiciano v. Joyeria Elizabeth I, Corp., and Joyeria Elizabeth II, Corp., and Joyeria Elizabeth III, Corp., and Joyeria Elizabeth IV, corp., and Thomas Izaquirre, individually, and Michelle Izaquirre, individually, Civil Case No.:21-cv-4508-VEC
As previously reported on this website, in Duran v. R&L Interior Renovations and Construction, Corp., and Luis Fermin, individually; Case Number:20-cv-9344, on
As previously reported on this website, in Hiciano v. Joyeria Elizabeth I, Corp., and Joyeria Elizabeth II, Corp., and Joyeria Elizabeth III, Corp., and Joyeria Elizabeth IV, corp., and Thomas Izaquirre, individually, and Michelle Izaquirre, individually, Civil Case No.:21-cv-4508, on June 10, 2021, Lead Plaintiff, Mr. Hiciano, on behalf of himself, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly-situated, filed a collective action lawsuit in the United States District Court Southern District of New York against JOYERIA ELIZABETH I, CORP., and JOYERIA ELIZABETH II, CORP., and JOYERIA ELIZABETH III, CORP., and JOYERIA ELIZABETH IV, CORP., (all four, collectively, as “Joyeria Elizabeth”), and THOMAS IZAQUIRRE, individually, and MICHELLE IZAQUIRRE, individually (together, with Joyeria Elizabeth, as “Defendants”), alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), the New York Labor Law (“NYLL”), and the New York Comp. Codes, Rules, and Regulations (“NYCCRR”), including the failure of Defendants to compensate Plaintiff for overtime wages. The claims of the case are referenced in our June 2021 blog post and are reviewed as follows:
Defendants violated Plaintiff’s rights guaranteed to him by the overtime provisions of the FLSA, the NYLL and the NYCCRR. Additionally, Defendants violated the NYLL by failing to provide Plaintiff with any wage statement on each payday, let alone a statement that accurately listed, inter alia, his actual hours worked and his overtime rates and overtime wages owed.
In this case, pursuant to the request of the Plaintiff, the Judge reviewed claims that the Plaintiff brought forward alleging that there are additional workers in the same “class” (performing the same or similar duties) whose rights have been violated. On December 1, 2021, Plaintiffs’ motion for approval of a collection action was granted, allowing the case to proceed as a collective action enabling any current and former employees who were not paid properly to join the lawsuit and seek redress for Defendants’ failure to compensate them in accordance with the law.
If you or a person you know worked for the Defendants named in the lawsuit during the time period of October 3, 2014 – present or has information that may be relevant to this case, contact Borrelli & Associates, P.L.L.C. as soon as possible through one of our websites, www.employmentlawyernewyork.com, www.516abogado.com or any of our phone numbers: (516) 248-5550, (516) ABOGADO, and (212) 679-5000.
The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) recently faced a significant legal setback as a federal…
If you’ve been offered a severance agreement, chances are you’re dealing with a challenging situation.…
May 2024 Valdez et al. v. Michpat & Fam, LLC d/b/a Dairy Queen Grill &…
New Action filed in the United States District Court Southern District of New York On…
Workers’ compensation is designed to protect employees who are injured on the job. It provides…
January 2024 Hiciano et al. v. Joyeria Elizabeth I, Corp., et al. Docket No: 21-cv-4508…