270 F. Supp. 3d 39
D.D.C.2017Background
- Six former electrical workers sued A Capital Electric Contractors, Inc. (a Virginia contractor) and its president/owner, Olga Gonzalez, alleging unpaid overtime from 2013–2016 under the FLSA, the D.C. Minimum Wage Revision Act (DCMWRA), and D.C., Maryland, and Virginia wage-payment laws.
- Plaintiffs allege they worked substantial hours on construction sites in the District of Columbia, were supervised by Gonzalez, and were paid without the required time-and-a-half overtime rate.
- Defendants removed the case from D.C. Superior Court to federal court and moved to dismiss for improper venue and failure to state a claim under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(3) and 12(b)(6).
- Defendants argued venue in D.C. was improper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because insufficient work occurred in D.C.; they also argued Plaintiffs were not "employees" for FLSA/DCMWRA purposes and thus could not state wage-payment claims.
- The Court treated Plaintiffs’ factual allegations as true for the motion-to-dismiss standards and evaluated employee status under the FLSA/DCMWRA economic-reality test.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Venue | Venue proper because a substantial portion of work occurred in D.C. and suit was filed in D.C. Superior Court | Venue improper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b); insufficient D.C.-based events | Denied dismissal: removed actions are governed by §1441(a); removal to the district embracing the original forum is proper, so venue in D.C. stands |
| Employee status (FLSA/DCMWRA) | Plaintiffs were employees: supervised by Gonzalez, hours set by her, and paid by A Capital | Plaintiffs insufficiently alleged economic-reality factors showing they were employees | Denied dismissal: allegations (Gonzalez as supervisor/owner who set hours) sufficiently plead employee status at pleading stage |
| Individual liability (Gonzalez) | Gonzalez exercised operational control and is liable as an employer | Gonzalez contests status as employer | Denied dismissal: corporate officer liability recognized where operational control and ownership alleged |
| State wage-payment claims | State claims follow federal/DC law and survive if overtime claims valid | State claims fail if FLSA/DCMWRA claims fail and only overtime unpaid is alleged | Denied dismissal: because federal/DC claims survive, related D.C., MD, VA wage-payment claims not dismissed |
Key Cases Cited
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (pleading standard: plausible factual allegations required)
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (pleading standard requires more than labels and conclusions)
- Polizzi v. Cowles Magazines, Inc., 345 U.S. 663 (removed actions governed by §1441 for venue)
- Goldberg v. Whitaker House Coop., Inc., 366 U.S. 28 (economic-reality test for employee status under FLSA)
- Morrison v. Int’l Programs Consortium, Inc., 253 F.3d 5 (D.C. Circuit discussion of employer/employee factors)
- Donovan v. Agnew, 712 F.2d 1509 (corporate officer liability under FLSA)