Jose Ortiz, Saul Hernandez, and Pedro Urena filed a brief in their District of New Jersey putative class-action employment lawsuit against Goya Foods opposing a motion from the defendant for the court to reconsider dismissal of the lawsuit. The plaintiffs claimed that the defendants broke Pennsylvania wage laws because they deducted from commissions and misclassified them as contractors. 

The court rejected the motion to dismiss in early September, ruling that the issue in the case was whether the plaintiffs deserve to be allowed to present evidence, not whether they would win the lawsuit. The judge said that the plaintiffs’ amended complaint did withstand the motion to dismiss. 

On September 17, the defendants filed, along with their answer to the amended complaint, a motion asking the court to reconsider their previous request that the case be dismissed, and purported that the court erred when declining to dismiss certain claims. In regards to the plaintiff’s failure to reimburse claims, they said, “there is simply no question that such claims fail as a matter of law and must be dismissed.” In response to claims of unlawful deduction, the defendants again said the court erred, claiming that the broker agreements between the parties answer the questions presented in the complaint. 

The plaintiffs in their motion, however, said this was not the case arguing that the court already declined to dismiss their claim of unlawful deduction and “implicitly rejected” the defendants’ argument for unreimbursed business expenses. They claimed the defendant’s motion did not contain any new information that would merit a second look from the court at dismissal of the case. They asked the court to deny the defendant’s motion for reconsideration entirely and keep the ruling they already gave on the motion. 

The plaintiffs are represented by Marchetti Law, P.C.; Sattiraju & Tharney, LLP; and Lichen Liss-Riodan, P.C. The defendants, including Goya Foods, Inc. and A.N.E. Services, Inc., are represented by Ogletree Deakins Nash Smoak & Stewart. 

Source Article