Ametepe v. Peak Time Parking, Corp.

Background

James Ametepe, on behalf of himself and opt-in plaintiffs Pedro Sabala and Emmanuel Boadi, sued Peak Time Parking, Corp., FIH Enterprise Inc., Sam Dar Enterprises Inc., AD Parking Inc., Zafar Majeed, Fayyaz Khan, Naveed Anjum, and Mustafa Ali Khandwalla. The plaintiffs alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law involving overtime pay, wage statements, and wage notices.

The defendants moved for summary judgment on all claims. The plaintiffs moved for partial summary judgment on whether particular defendants were employers or joint employers, whether several entities operated as a single enterprise, whether the defendants violated the wage-statement requirement, whether certain affirmative defenses should be dismissed, and whether the defendants failed as a matter of law to keep accurate wage records.

The court reviewed Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron’s Report and Recommendation. It adopted the report except for two aspects challenged by the plaintiffs: whether Majeed was Boadi’s employer and whether Anjum failed to provide proper wage statements to Ametepe and Sabala.

Rulings on Employer Status

The court granted summary judgment for the plaintiffs on whether Majeed was Boadi’s employer. Applying the Fair Labor Standards Act’s economic-reality analysis, the court held that Boadi was an employee rather than an independent contractor. Majeed participated in hiring Boadi, supervised employees at AD Parking, paid their wages, and was AD Parking’s sole owner. The court concluded that Boadi’s short or probationary period did not change his employee status.

The court also adopted the findings that Anjum was an employer of Ametepe and Sabala and that Peak Time, Sam Dar, and Anjum were joint employers of Ametepe and Sabala. It denied the plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment on whether Khan was an employer of Ametepe and on whether Majeed joined Peak Time, Sam Dar, and Anjum as a joint employer of Ametepe and Sabala, because factual disputes remained.

The court denied the plaintiffs’ motion on whether Peak Time, Sam Dar, FIH, and AD Parking operated as a single enterprise of parking garages. The defendants’ motion for summary judgment was denied in its entirety because the plaintiffs had identified factual disputes concerning the alleged single enterprise and whether the defendants met the Fair Labor Standards Act’s $500,000 enterprise-revenue threshold.

Wage Statements

The court granted summary judgment for Ametepe and Sabala on their claim that Anjum violated New York Labor Law § 195(3) by failing to furnish required wage statements. The payroll records were missing the employer’s telephone number and the employees’ net wages, both of which the statute required. The court also found no evidence that the records had been given to the employees as copies; signing or initialing records was not enough. Anjum testified that the workers signed the paper and were given cash, rather than being given wage-statement copies.

Affirmative Defenses and Recordkeeping

The court denied the plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss the faithless-servant defense. Anjum testified that Ametepe repeatedly took cash from customers. Although Ametepe disputed the accusation and the evidence lacked corroboration, the court held that Anjum’s eyewitness testimony was admissible and created a factual issue for the jury.

The court also denied the plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss the defendants’ good-faith defense. Because liability for the wage claims had not yet been decided, the court considered it premature to determine whether the defendants acted in good faith or had objectively reasonable grounds for believing their conduct complied with the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The court denied the plaintiffs’ motion concerning the defendants’ asserted lack of willfulness and their alleged failure to maintain accurate wage-and-hour records. Those issues remained for further proceedings.

Disposition

Judge Engelmayer entered summary judgment for the plaintiffs on four issues: Anjum’s employer status as to Ametepe and Sabala; the joint-employer status of Peak Time, Sam Dar, and Anjum as to Ametepe and Sabala; Majeed’s employer status as to Boadi; and Anjum’s failure to furnish wage statements to Ametepe and Sabala. The court denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment in its entirety and denied the plaintiffs’ motion on the remaining listed issues. The case was directed to proceed to trial on the outstanding claims.