Athayde v. Dogpound Fitness, Inc.
- Sarah Netburn
- 1:22-cv-09547
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Athayde v. Dogpound Fitness, Judge Netburn ordered both sides to brief how New York labor law may apply to the plaintiff’s wage claims.
The plaintiff, Rhys Athayde, and the defendants, Dogpound Fitness, Inc. and the other defendants named in the case, were required to address the court’s questions in letter briefs.
What happened
In Athayde v. Dogpound Fitness, Inc., the parties had submitted a joint document outlining issues for trial. The court said it needed more information about the parties’ positions on New York Labor Law.
The court asked how the plaintiff’s regular pay should be calculated if the jury finds he was a non-exempt employee during periods when he was paid a salary. It also asked whether New York’s minimum-wage rules or another method for calculating overtime pay applies. The court separately asked whether New York law covers work the plaintiff performed outside New York State, including work for the Los Angeles gym, and what law would apply if New York law does not.
The court ordered each party to file a letter brief of no more than five pages by January 10, 2025. Judge Sarah Netburn did not decide these legal issues in this order.
The detailed version
- Athayde v. Dogpound Fitness, Inc. · No. 1:22-cv-09547
- Sarah Netburn
- Jan. 8, 2025
Background
On January 3, 2025, the parties submitted a joint pretrial order. The court sought additional briefing about the parties’ positions concerning the application of New York Labor Law.
Issues for briefing
The court first asked how the plaintiff’s regular rate of pay should be determined if the jury finds that he was a non-exempt employee during the periods when he was paid a salary. The court directed the parties to address whether the New York Minimum Wage Order for Miscellaneous Industries and Occupations applies. It also asked whether the fluctuating workweek method for calculating pay applies, while allowing the parties to argue for another method. The parties must provide legal and factual support for their positions.
The court also noted that the defendants had briefly suggested that the plaintiff cannot recover under New York law for work performed outside New York State. The parties must address the legal and factual support for that position. In particular, they must discuss what authority would exclude work performed in or for the Los Angeles gym, or elsewhere outside New York State, from New York Labor Law; what jurisdiction’s law would apply instead; and how that law would apply to the facts of the case.
Order
The court directed each party to file a letter brief addressing both issues. Each brief may not exceed five pages and was due January 10, 2025. This order requested briefing and did not resolve the underlying wage-and-hour issues. Judge Sarah Netburn signed the order as a United States Magistrate Judge.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.