Myers v. Brook Ville Beer Inc., and Pizza Wonder Inc., and Malak I. Ahmad, individually, Index No.:602854/2021
On March 9, 2021, Plaintiff Myers filed a lawsuit in the Supreme Court of the State of New York County of Nassau against BROOK VILLE BEER INC. (“Brook Ville”), and PIZZA WONDER INC. (“Pizza Wonder”), and MALAK I. AHMAD, individually (“Ahmad”, all three, together where appropriate, as “Defendants”), alleging upon knowledge as to himself and his own actions and upon information and belief as to all other matters, as follows:
Plaintiff worked for Defendants – – two corporations that operate in Nassau County, Brook Ville as a beer and beverage store and Pizza Wonder as a pizzeria, as well as the owner and day-to-day overseer of both businesses – – first as a store clerk for Brook Ville from on or around July 1, 2016 through May 2, 2017, and thereafter as a delivery driver for Pizza Wonder from September 16, 2019 through October 16, 2019. As described below, throughout both periods of Plaintiff’s employment, Defendants, as applicable, failed to pay Plaintiff the overtime wages lawfully due to him under the New York Labor Law (“NYLL”) ad the N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. (“NYCRR”), and during his employment period with Brook Ville, failed to pay him at least the minimum wage for any of his hours worked. Specifically, for his first employment period with Brook Ville, Defendants Brook Ville and Ahmad required Plaintiff to work more than forty hours in a week and paid Plaintiff a flat weekly rate, which operated by law to cover all of the hours that Plaintiff worked in a week, and which fell below New York’s minimum wage rate for all hours that he worked. During this first period of employment, these Defendants further failed to pay Plaintiff at the rate of one and one-half times the minimum wage rate for the hours that Plaintiff worked over forty in a week. Then, for his second period of employment with Pizza wonder when Plaintiff was delivering ready-to-eat food to Defendants Pizza Wonder and Ahmad’s customers, these Defendants again required Plaintiff to work more than forty hours in a week while paying Plaintiff a flat weekly salary. Yet this time, the flat salary operated by law to cover only Plaintiff’s first forty hours of work in a week, and Defendants paid Plaintiff nothing, and thus not at the rate of one and one-half times his regular hourly rate for the hours that Plaintiff worked over forty in a week.
Defendants further violated the NYLL and the NYCRR by failing to provide Plaintiff with: spread-of-hours pay during either stint of his employment whenever his workday exceeded ten hours from start to finish; any wage statement on each payday, let alone an accurate wage statement; and any wage notice at his time of hire or rehire, let alone an accurate wage notice.
If any individual is or has previously been an employee of the Defendants named in the lawsuit and/or has information that may be relevant to this case, please contact Borrelli & Associates, P.L.L.C. as soon as possible through one of our websites, www.employmentlawyernewyork.com or www.516abogado.com, or any of our phone numbers: (516) 248–5550, (516) ABOGADO, or (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…