Bello Paulino v. S & P Mini Market Corp.
- Gabriel Gorenstein
- 1:22-cv-08724
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Bello Paulino v. S & P Mini Market Corp., Judge Gorenstein revised proposed jury instructions on overtime pay, employer status, and undisputed payments.
The plaintiffs, defendants, and their counsel in the pending trial were affected by the revised jury instructions and objection deadlines.
What happened
Bello Paulino v. S & P Mini Market Corp. concerns proposed jury instructions for an upcoming trial. The court sent counsel a new draft, verdict sheet, and charts, and invited the parties to identify significant problems before the charge conference.
The draft instructions addressed how to calculate the regular pay rate for weeks when an employee worked more than 40 hours, how to decide whether a party was an employer, and the parties’ agreement that there was no dispute about how much Paulino was paid. The court stated that the market falls within New York hospitality-industry regulations for calculating overtime pay.
Judge Gorenstein ordered that major objections and proposed revisions be submitted promptly, while minor objections could be raised in court. This order addressed the conduct of the trial and jury instructions; it did not state a final result on the parties’ claims.
The detailed version
- Bello Paulino v. S & P Mini Market Corp. · No. 1:22-cv-08724
- Gabriel Gorenstein
- Jan. 13, 2025
What the order concerns
The court issued an interim order about proposed jury instructions for the trial. It emailed counsel a new draft of the instructions, along with a verdict sheet and charts. The parties could present their objections fully at the charge conference after trial began, but the court asked them to identify significant problems as soon as possible. It stated that major objections should be submitted by the following Tuesday, if possible, and that minor objections could be presented in court on Wednesday morning.
Overtime-pay instruction
The court removed language about whether the parties intended Paulino’s wages to cover only the first 40 hours of a workweek or additional hours. The court stated that S&P Mini Market falls within the hospitality-industry regulations under the New York Labor Law. For weeks in which an employee works more than 40 hours, those regulations provide that the employee’s regular pay rate is calculated by dividing weekly pay by 40. The opinion cites New York regulations at 12 N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. § 146-3.5(b).
Employer-status instruction
The court modified the parties’ proposed instructions on who qualifies as an employer. It explained that operational control is not a separate factor in the employer test; rather, it is the central substance of that test. The court cited Irizarry v. Catsimatidis, 722 F.3d 99, 107 (2d Cir. 2013), and made other changes to align the instruction with that decision.
Undisputed payment amount
Because of the parties’ stipulation, the instructions state that there is no dispute about how much Paulino was paid.
Disposition and significance
The order revised proposed trial materials and established a process for objections. It did not announce a final judgment or a final ruling on the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.