Case 2:21-cv-07019 Document 1 Filed 12/20/21 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`COMPLAINT
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Class Action Lawsuit
`Jury Trial Demanded
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`----------------------------------------------------------------------------X
`JESUS BRITO, on behalf of himself and all other persons
`similarly situated,
`
`
`
`
`-against-
`
`QUEST DIAGNOSTICS INCORPORATED and
`QUEST DIAGNOSTICS CLINICAL LABORATORIES, INC.,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`----------------------------------------------------------------------------X
`
`
`
`Plaintiff, Jesus Brito (“Plaintiff”), on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly
`
`situated, by and through his attorneys, the Law Office of Peter A. Romero PLLC, complaining of
`
`the Defendants, Quest Diagnostics Incorporated and Quest Diagnostics Clinical Laboratories, Inc.
`
`(“Defendants” or “Quest”), alleges as follows:
`
`NATURE OF THE ACTION
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of himself and similarly situated current and
`
`former employees of Quest who worked as drivers, couriers and route service representatives in
`
`the State of New York pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to recover
`
`statutory damages pursuant to New York Labor Law § 198(1-a) for violations of New York Labor
`
`Law § 191 and § 195(1). Plaintiff seeks injunctive and declaratory relief, liquidated damages,
`
`attorneys’ fees and costs and other appropriate relief pursuant to New York Labor Law § 198.
`
`2.
`
`Upon information and belief, Quest is the world’s leading provider of diagnostic
`
`information services and provides clinical laboratory testing performed on whole blood, serum,
`
`plasma and other body fluids, such as urine, and specimens such as microbiology samples.
`
`3.
`
`Upon information and belief, during 2020, Quest generated net revenues of $9.4
`
`billion.
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-07019 Document 1 Filed 12/20/21 Page 2 of 8 PageID #: 2
`
`4.
`
`Upon information and belief, as of January 2021, Quest had approximately 40,000
`
`fulltime employees.
`
`5.
`
`At all relevant times, Quest compensated Plaintiff and all other hourly-paid
`
`employees who worked as drivers, couriers and route service representatives in the State of New
`
`York on a bi-weekly basis in violation of New York Labor Law, Article 6, §§ 191.
`
`6.
`
`Defendants failed to properly pay Plaintiff and other former and current employees
`
`who have worked in hourly-paid positions such as drivers, couriers and route service
`
`representatives in the State of New York their wages within seven calendar days after the end of
`
`the week in which these wages were earned. Thus, Defendants failed to provide timely wages to
`
`Plaintiff and all other persons similarly situated.
`
`7.
`
`Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly
`
`situated pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 (“Rule 23”) to remedy violations of the
`
`New York Labor Law, Article 6, §§ 191, 195.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`8.
`
`This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act
`
`(“CAFA”), 28 U.S.C. §1332(d). This is a putative class action in which there are 100 or more
`
`members in the proposed class, any member of the proposed class is a citizen of a state and any
`
`defendant is a citizen of a different state, and the amount in controversy exceeds the sum of
`
`$5,000,000.00 in the aggregate.
`
`9.
`
`Venue is proper in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New
`
`York pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1391(b)(2) because a substantial part of the events or omissions
`
`giving rise to the claims occurred in this district and Plaintiff suffered the losses at issue in this
`
`District.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-07019 Document 1 Filed 12/20/21 Page 3 of 8 PageID #: 3
`
`PARTIES
`
`Plaintiff is a resident of the State of New York.
`
`At all times relevant, Plaintiff was an “employee” within the meaning of New York
`
`
`
`10.
`
`11.
`
`Labor Law § 190(2) and a “manual worker” within the meaning of New York Labor Law §
`
`190(4).
`
`
`
`12.
`
`Defendant, Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, is a Delaware corporation with
`
`corporate headquarters in New Jersey.
`
`13.
`
`Defendant, Quest Diagnostics Clinical Laboratories, Inc., is a Delaware
`
`corporation with corporate headquarters in New Jersey.
`
`FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`14.
`
`Plaintiff was employed by Quest as an hourly-paid driver, courier and/or route
`
`service representative in the State of New York from in or about May 2021 to December 16, 2021.
`
`15.
`
`Plaintiff’s primary job duties involved operating Quest-owned vehicles and
`
`transporting clinical specimens, the performance of which required prolonged driving, the ability
`
`to lift up to 40 pounds, bending, pulling and reaching. Plaintiff spent more than twenty-five
`
`percent of his hours worked each week performing manual tasks.
`
`16.
`
`Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff and similarly situated persons who have worked
`
`in hourly-paid positions as drivers, couriers and route service representatives in the State of New
`
`York “on a weekly basis and not later than seven calendar days after the end of the week in which
`
`the wages are earned” as required by New York Labor Law § 191. Instead, Defendants paid
`
`Plaintiff and similarly situated persons who have worked in hourly-paid positions as drivers,
`
`couriers and route service representatives on a bi-weekly basis pursuant to a company-wide
`
`payroll policy in violation of New York Labor Law § 191.
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-07019 Document 1 Filed 12/20/21 Page 4 of 8 PageID #: 4
`
`17.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendants failed to provide Plaintiff and similarly
`
`situated persons who have worked in hourly-paid positions as drivers, couriers and route service
`
`representatives with notice of their wage rate and the basis of pay upon their hire as required by
`
`New York Labor Law § 195(1).
`
`RULE 23 CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
`NEW YORK STATE LABOR LAW
`
`Plaintiff brings New York Labor Law claims on behalf of himself and a class of
`
`
`
`18.
`
`persons under F.R.C.P. Rule 23 consisting of all persons who are currently, or have been,
`
`employed by Quest in hourly-paid positions such as drivers, couriers and route service
`
`representatives in the State of New York at any time during the six (6) years prior to the filing of
`
`the initial Complaint and the date of judgment in this action (hereinafter referred to as the “Class”
`
`or the “Class Members”).
`
`
`
`19.
`
`The Class Members are readily ascertainable. The number and identity of the Class
`
`Members are determinable from the records of Defendants. Upon information and belief, there
`
`are more than 500 Class Members who have worked for Quest in hourly-paid positions such as
`
`drivers, couriers and route service representatives in the State of New York at any time during the
`
`six (6) years prior to the filing of the initial Complaint. The hours assigned and worked, the
`
`position held, and rates of pay for each Class Member may also be determinable from Defendants’
`
`records. For purposes of notice and other purposes related to this action, their names and addresses
`
`are readily available from Defendants. Notice can be provided by means permissible under
`
`F.R.C.P. Rule 23.
`
`
`
`20.
`
`The proposed Class is numerous such that a joinder of all members is impracticable,
`
`and the disposition of their claims as a class will benefit the parties and the Court. Although the
`
`precise number of such persons is unknown because the facts on which the calculation of that
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-07019 Document 1 Filed 12/20/21 Page 5 of 8 PageID #: 5
`
`number rests presently within the sole control of Defendants, upon information and belief there
`
`are over 500 individuals who are currently, or have been, employed by Defendants in hourly-paid
`
`positions such as drivers, couriers and route service representatives at any time in the State of New
`
`York during the six (6) years prior to the filing of the initial Complaint.
`
`21.
`
`There are questions of law and fact common to the Class which predominate over
`
`any questions affecting only individual class members, including, but not limited to, whether
`
`Defendants paid Plaintiff and Class Members on a bi-weekly or semi-monthly basis in violation
`
`of New York Labor Law section 191 and the nature and extent of the Class-wide injury and the
`
`appropriate measure of damages for the class.
`
`22.
`
`Plaintiff’s claims are typical of the claims of the Class that he seeks to represent.
`
`Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff “on a weekly basis and not later than seven calendar days after
`
`the end of the week in which the wages are earned,” as required by New York Labor Law § 191.
`
`Plaintiff’s claims are typical of those claims that could be alleged by any member of the Class, and
`
`the relief sought is typical of the relief that would be sought by each member of the Class in
`
`separate actions.
`
`23.
`
`All the Class Members were subject to the same corporate practices of Defendants.
`
`Defendants’ corporate-wide policies and practices affected all Class Members similarly, and
`
`Defendants benefited from the same type of unfair and/or wrongful acts as to each Class Member.
`
`Plaintiff and other Class Members sustained similar losses, injuries and damages arising from the
`
`same unlawful policies, practices, and procedures.
`
`24.
`
`Plaintiff is able to fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Class and has no
`
`interests antagonistic to the Class. Plaintiff has retained counsel competent and experienced in
`
`class actions, wage and hour litigation, and employment litigation.
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-07019 Document 1 Filed 12/20/21 Page 6 of 8 PageID #: 6
`
`25.
`
`A class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient
`
`adjudication of litigation, particularly in the context of wage and hour litigation like the present
`
`action, where individual Plaintiffs may lack the financial resources to vigorously prosecute a
`
`lawsuit in court against a corporate defendant.
`
`26.
`
`Class action treatment will permit a large number of similarly situated persons to
`
`prosecute their common claims in a single forum simultaneously, efficiently, and without the
`
`unnecessary duplication of efforts and expense that numerous individual actions engender. The
`
`adjudication of individual litigation claims would result in a great expenditure of Court and public
`
`resources; however, treating the claims as a class action would result in a significant savings of
`
`these costs. The prosecution of separate actions by individual Class members would create a risk
`
`of inconsistent and/or varying adjudications with respect to the individual Class members,
`
`establishing incompatible standards of conduct for the Defendants. Moreover, the issues in this
`
`action can be decided by means of common, class-wide proof.
`
`27.
`
`The members of the Class have been damaged and are entitled to recovery as a
`
`result of Defendant’s common and uniform policies, practices, and procedures. Although the
`
`relative damages suffered by individual Rule 23 Class members are not de minimis, such damages
`
`are small compared to the expense and burden of individual prosecution of this litigation.
`
`28.
`
`In addition, class treatment is superior because it will obviate the need for unduly
`
`duplicative litigation that may result in inconsistent judgments about Defendants’ practices.
`
`29.
`
`Furthermore, current employees are often afraid to assert their rights out of fear of
`
`direct or indirect retaliation. Former employees are fearful of bringing claims because doing so
`
`can harm their employment, future employment, and future efforts to secure employment. Class
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-07019 Document 1 Filed 12/20/21 Page 7 of 8 PageID #: 7
`
`actions provide Class Members who are not named in the complaint a degree of anonymity, which
`
`allows for the vindication of their rights while eliminating or reducing those risks.
`
`FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`FREQUENCY OF PAYMENT VIOLATION
`
`Plaintiff alleges and incorporates by reference all allegations in all preceding
`
`30.
`
`paragraphs.
`
`31.
`
`Plaintiff and Class Members are manual workers as defined by the New York Labor
`
`Law.
`
`32.
`
`Defendants were required to pay the Plaintiff and Class Members on a weekly basis,
`
`and no later than seven days after the end of the workweek in which the wages were earned.
`
`33.
`
`Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff and Class Members on a weekly basis and instead
`
`paid Plaintiff and Class Members bi-weekly in violation of New York Labor Law § 191.
`
`34.
`
`Plaintiff and Class Members are entitled to damages equal to the total of the delayed
`
`wages and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs.
`
`SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`WAGE STATEMENT VIOLATION
`
`35.
`
`Plaintiff alleges and incorporates by reference all allegations in all preceding
`
`paragraphs.
`
`36.
`
`Defendants failed to provide Plaintiff and Class Members a notice at the time of
`
`hire that states their regular hourly wage rate, overtime rate of pay, basis of pay, and other
`
`information required by NYLL § 195(1).
`
`37.
`
`Defendants are liable to Plaintiff and Class Members for statutory damages
`
`pursuant to NYLL § 198.
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:21-cv-07019 Document 1 Filed 12/20/21 Page 8 of 8 PageID #: 8
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`38.
`
`Plaintiff requests a trial by jury.
`
`
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated
`
`persons, prays for the following relief:
`
`(i.)
`
`Certification of a Class Action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23;
`
`(ii.) Designation of Plaintiff as representative of the Class and counsel of record as Class
`Counsel;
`
`Issuance of a declaratory judgment that the practices complained of in this
`(iii.)
`Amended Complaint are unlawful under the NYLL and the supporting N.Y.S DOL Regulations;
`
`
`(iv.) Damages pursuant to NYLL § 198;
`
`(v.)
`
`Reasonable attorneys’ fees and the costs incurred in prosecuting these claims;
`
`(vi.)
`
`Pre-judgment and post-judgment interest as permitted by law; and
`
`(vii.) Such other relief as this Court deems just and proper.
`
`Dated: Hauppauge, New York
`
`December 20, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`LAW OFFICE OF PETER A. ROMERO PLLC
`
`
`/s Peter A. Romero
`__________________
`Peter A. Romero, Esq.
`490 Wheeler Road, Suite 250
`Hauppauge, New York 11788
`Tel. (631) 257-5588
`promero@romerolawny.com
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff
`
`8
`
`