Garcia v. 2390 C LLC

Background

Ernesto Garcia brought a proposed collective and class action against 2390 Creston Realty LLC, 2390 C LLC, and Denali Management Inc. The opinion describes 2390 C LLC and Denali Management Inc. as Garcia’s former employers. Garcia alleged claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the federal wage-and-hour law, and the New York Labor Law (NYLL).

Garcia alleged that he worked as a superintendent at a residential property from February 2019 through September 26, 2022. He said he performed janitorial and non-janitorial tasks, including taking out garbage, making apartment repairs, painting, changing locks, handling tenant complaints, coordinating with vendors and contractors, and supervising the property. He alleged that he worked long hours but was not paid minimum and overtime wages for time worked over 40 hours per week. He also alleged violations involving required wage records, wage statements, and annual pay notices.

The court had previously dismissed Garcia’s first amended complaint. Garcia then filed a Second Amended Complaint. Defendants 2390 C LLC and Denali Management Inc. moved to dismiss that complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which tests whether a complaint states a legally plausible claim. The opinion also states that 2390 Creston Realty LLC failed to appear and that the court previously entered default judgment against it.

Federal overtime claim

The court held that Garcia did not plausibly allege that he worked more than 40 hours in a particular week without receiving the required overtime pay. The complaint described his schedule and hours inconsistently. It alleged, among other things, that he worked seven days per week from 8:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.; six days per week on the same schedule, sometimes working his designated day off; an average of 50 hours per week; approximately 60 hours per week; and approximately 63 hours per week.

The court explained that a plaintiff need not plead mathematically exact hours, but must provide enough factual detail and context to make the overtime claim plausible. In the court’s view, Garcia’s conflicting allegations did not establish a particular workweek in which he worked more than 40 hours. The court also noted drafting problems and missing information in the complaint, including an unfinished allegation about the amount of overtime compensation and a placeholder for a person’s name.

The court dismissed Garcia’s FLSA overtime claim without prejudice. The opinion’s use of “without prejudice” means the claim was not permanently barred by that ruling.

Federal recordkeeping claim

The court held that the FLSA does not provide a private right of action to enforce its recordkeeping requirements. It also stated that Garcia’s allegations supporting this claim were threadbare and lacked factual support.

The court dismissed the FLSA recordkeeping claim with prejudice. The opinion’s use of “with prejudice” means that claim was permanently dismissed in this action.

New York-law claims

Garcia also asserted NYLL claims involving overtime, unpaid wages, recordkeeping, and wage statements. Defendants argued that the claims should be dismissed based on the NYLL’s exemption for a janitor in a residential building. The court declined to disregard Garcia’s allegations in the Second Amended Complaint that identified him as a superintendent rather than a resident janitor.

Instead, because the court had dismissed Garcia’s FLSA claims, it declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the NYLL claims. Supplemental jurisdiction is the court’s authority to decide related state-law claims in the same case as federal claims. The court dismissed the NYLL claims without prejudice.

Leave to amend and disposition

The court concluded that amendment might not be futile and granted Garcia leave to file a Third Amended Complaint. It ordered that the new complaint be filed by July 17, 2025, and stated that it would replace rather than supplement the prior complaint. Defendants were directed to answer or otherwise respond by July 31, 2025, if Garcia filed the new complaint.

The court’s conclusion states that defendants’ motion to dismiss was granted. Garcia’s FLSA overtime claims were dismissed without prejudice; his FLSA recordkeeping claims were dismissed with prejudice; and his NYLL claims were dismissed without prejudice. If Garcia failed to file a Third Amended Complaint by the deadline, the claims dismissed without prejudice would be deemed dismissed with prejudice. Judge Nelson S. Roman directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motion at ECF No. 67.