Pelayo v. Platinum Limousine Services, Inc., 1:15-cv-00023

Plaintiffs Pelayo, Manankil, and Boreliz are former Platinum Limousine drivers who allege unpaid minimum, regular and overtime wages and unreimbursed expenses; they seek collective/class relief under the FLSA and HRS Chapter 388.
Alleged unpaid work includes pre-shift vehicle cleaning, post-shift cleaning/returning vehicles, waiting between jobs (on-duty), and required meetings; some expenses (e.g., bottled water, gasoline) allegedly went unreimbursed.
Plaintiffs plead an implied promise by Platinum to comply with wage laws and allege company-wide policies refusing required pay; Tsuneyoshi is alleged to have exercised control as owner/manager.
Claims asserted: (1) HRS §§ 388-2 and/or 388-6 (timely pay/withholding), (2) conversion, (3) unjust enrichment, (4) FLSA violations. Defendants moved to dismiss Counts 1–3 and certain claims by Boreliz.
Court dismissed the HRS § 388-2 claim (plaintiffs conceded no bi‑monthly pay violation) and dismissed conversion; it denied dismissal of HRS § 388-6, unjust enrichment (allowed as alternative theory), and denied dismissal of Boreliz’s claims.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Validity of HRS § 388-2 claim	Plaintiffs plead unpaid wages under Chapter 388	Platinum: no allegation wages were not paid at least twice monthly	Dismissed — plaintiffs conceded and failed to allege bi‑monthly payment violation
Preemption of HRS § 388-6 by FLSA	§ 388-6 enforces unpaid wages/withholding and can coexist with FLSA; plaintiffs may pursue state remedy	Platinum: FLSA preempts state claim (field or conflict) and provides exclusive remedy	Denied — FLSA savings clause preserves state wage laws; no field or conflict preemption found
Conversion claim for unpaid wages/altered payroll records	Plaintiffs: unpaid wages and unreimbursed expenses constitute property converted by defendants	Platinum: Hawai‘i law does not recognize conversion for unpaid wages/intangible/general debts	Granted — Hawai‘i would not extend conversion to unpaid wages or payroll records; conversion claim dismissed
Unjust enrichment as alternative remedy	Plaintiffs: claim pleaded in alternative; may be necessary if statutory remedies fail	Platinum: FLSA/HRS provide adequate remedies so equitable claim improper	Denied — unjust enrichment permitted as alternative where legal remedy may prove inadequate

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662 (pleading standard: plausible claim required)
Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (pleading requires more than conclusory allegations)
Williamson v. Gen. Dynamics Corp., 208 F.3d 1144 (9th Cir. 2000) (FLSA contains savings clause preserving state wage laws)
Wang v. Chinese Daily News, Inc., 623 F.3d 743 (9th Cir. 2010) (state-law claims borrowing FLSA standards are not preempted)
Knepper v. Rite Aid Corp., 675 F.3d 249 (3d Cir. 2012) (Congress contemplated dual enforcement of FLSA and state law)
In re Wal-Mart Wage & Hour Employment Practices Litigation, 490 F. Supp. 2d 1091 (D. Nev. 2007) (forecast that Hawai‘i would not recognize conversion for unpaid wages)
Freddy Nobriga Enters., Inc. v. Hawai‘i Dep’t of Hawaiian Home Lands, 295 P.3d 993 (Haw. App. 2013) (discussion of conversion elements under Hawai‘i law)
Porter v. Hu, 169 P.3d 994 (Haw. App. 2007) (elements of unjust enrichment)
Hough v. Pacific Ins. Co., Ltd., 927 P.2d 858 (Haw. 1996) (worker’s compensation context; did not substantively adopt conversion-for-wages rule)