Sosa Claret v. Toscana Pizza & Grill, LLC
0:24-cv-60508
| S.D. Fla. | Apr 7, 2025Background
- Plaintiffs Sosa Claret and Juarez Solis originally filed suit in Florida state court alleging wage and hour law violations against Toscana Pizza & Grill, LLC, and its individual owners.
- Claims included violations of both the Florida Minimum Wage Act (FMWA) and the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), among others, initially seeking collective action status.
- Defendants removed the case to federal court, but defaults were entered after the company failed to secure counsel and individual defendants failed to appear.
- Plaintiffs narrowed their claims to just state law FMWA minimum wage claims (Counts I & II), withdrawing all federal and collective counts.
- The court raised the issue that, with only state claims left, federal subject matter jurisdiction was lost, and requested briefing on remand.
- Plaintiffs then consented to remand, citing recent Supreme Court guidance on jurisdiction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the remaining claims support federal jurisdiction | Only state law claims remain; no FLSA counts | No appearance | Only state claims: no federal jurisdiction |
| Whether case should be remanded to state court | Remand is appropriate and efficient | No appearance | Recommended for remand to Florida state court |
| Sufficiency of FLSA claim pleading | opts not to amend FLSA allegations | N/A | Plaintiffs declined; state claims remain only |
| Dismissal of remaining federal and non-FMWA claims | Seeks to amend to drop those counts | N/A | Amendment allowed, only FMWA claims proceed |
Key Cases Cited
- Palazzo v. Gulf Oil Corp., 764 F.2d 1381 (11th Cir. 1985) (corporate entities must be represented by counsel; cannot appear pro se)
- Royal Canin U.S.A., Inc. v. Wullschleger, 604 U.S. 22 (2025) (if all federal claims are dropped post-removal, federal jurisdiction is lost and remand is required)
- Baxter v. Santiago-Miranda, 121 F.4th 873 (11th Cir. 2024) (plaintiff's request to dismiss certain claims may be treated as a motion to amend under Rule 15(a)(2))