1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION

CASE NO:

ELVIS EDWARD GALLARDO BUSTAMANTE, 

Plaintiff,

vs.

MARRERO CONSTRUCTION CORP. and

MARTIN MARRERO, JR.,

Defendants.

___________________________________________/

COMPLAINT

COMES NOW Plaintiff, ELVIS EDWARD GALLARDO BUSTAMANTE, through his 

undersigned counsel, and files this Complaint against Defendants MARRERO 

CONSTRUCTION CORP. and MARTIN MARRERO, JR., and states:

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. This is an action arising under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 201-216. This 

Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 as this case is brought pursuant to the 

Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. § 216.

2. The Plaintiff ELVIS EDWARD GALLARDO BUSTAMANTE was a resident of 

Broward County, Florida at the time the dispute arose and is sui juris.

3. The Defendant MARRERO CONSTRUCTION CORP. regularly transacts business in 

Broward County. The Defendant corporation was the Plaintiff’s FLSA employer during 

Plaintiff’s relevant period of employment (“the relevant time period”).

Case 0:20-cv-61193-RAR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/16/2020 Page 1 of 5
2

4. The Defendant MARTIN MARRERO, JR. is the owner and/or manager of the Defendant 

corporation who ran the day-to-day operations of the Corporate Defendant for the 

relevant time period and was responsible for paying Plaintiff’s wages for the relevant 

time period and controlled Plaintiff’s work and schedule and was, therefore, Plaintiff’s 

employer as defined by 29 U.S.C. § 203(d).

5. Venue is proper in this Court because Plaintiff was a resident of Miami-Dade County, 

Florida, at the time the dispute arose, the Defendants do business in Broward County, 

Florida, and the events giving rise to these claims occurred within Broward County, 

Florida.

6. Plaintiff worked for Defendants doing construction work from before January 1, 2010 

through May 2, 2020.

7. The acts and/or omissions giving rise to this Complaint arose in Broward County, 

Florida.

COUNT I. FEDERAL OVERTIME WAGE VIOLATION UNDER 29 U.S.C. §§ 201 - 216 

8. Plaintiff re-alleges the factual and jurisdictional statements in paragraphs 1 through 7 as 

though fully set forth herein.

9. This action arises under the laws of the United States.

10. 29 U.S.C. § 207(a)(1) states, “Except as otherwise provided in this section, no employer 

shall employ any of his employees who in any workweek is engaged in commerce or in 

the production of goods for commerce, or is employed in an enterprise engaged in 

commerce or in the production of goods for commerce, for a workweek longer than forty 

hours unless such employee receives compensation for his employment in excess of the 

Case 0:20-cv-61193-RAR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/16/2020 Page 2 of 5
3

hours above specified at a rate not less than one and one-half times the regular rate at 

which he is employed.”

11. Plaintiff worked for Defendants as a construction worker.

12. Defendants are liable for overtime pay for the entire period of Plaintiff’s employment or 

as much as allowed by the FLSA.

13. As a construction worker, Plaintiff was required to use tools and materials obtained from 

local, national, and international sources to construct buildings that were contracted for 

by customers who were local, national, and international residents.

14. Defendants’ business activities involve those to which the FLSA applies. Both the 

Defendants’ business and the Plaintiff’s work for the Defendants affected interstate 

commerce for the relevant time period because the materials and goods Plaintiff used on 

a constant and/or continual basis and/or that were supplied to Plaintiff by the Defendants 

to use on the job moved through interstate commerce prior to and/or subsequent to 

Plaintiff’s use of the same. The Plaintiff’s work for the Defendants was actually in 

and/or so closely related to the movement of commerce while he worked for the 

Defendants that the FLSA applies to Plaintiff’s work for the Defendants.

15. Additionally, Defendants regularly employed two or more employees for the relevant 

time period who handled goods or materials that travelled through interstate commerce, 

or used instrumentalities of interstate commerce as Plaintiff did, thus making Defendants’ 

business enterprise covered under the FLSA.

16. Upon information and belief, the Defendant corporation had gross sales or business done 

in excess of $500,000 annually for the years 2017, 2018, 2019, and likely will have gross 

sales in excess of $500,000 for the year 2020.

Case 0:20-cv-61193-RAR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/16/2020 Page 3 of 5
4

17. Throughout his employment with Defendants, Plaintiff worked more than 40 hours per 

week. Plaintiff worked approximately 60 hours per week for Defendants.

18. Plaintiff was paid $175 per day, regardless of how many hours he worked in a day or in a 

week. Plaintiff was not paid overtime for any hours over 40 per week, so he is owed 

half-time for all hours he worked over 40 each week, as required by the FLSA. Plaintiff, 

therefore, claims the half-time rate required by the Fair Labor Standards Act.

19. On average, Plaintiff worked 12 hours per day for five days per week.

20. The calculations for what Plaintiff is owed for half-time hours are as follows:

$175/12 hours = $14.58/hr

5 days per week @ 12 hours per day = 60 hours per week.

Overtime rate not paid = $7.29/hr

$7.29 x 20 hours per week = $145.80/wk

$145.80 x 152 weeks = $22,161.60 

21. Defendants willfully and intentionally refused to pay Plaintiff’s overtime wages as 

required by the FLSA as Defendants knew of the overtime requirements of the FLSA and 

refused to pay Plaintiff overtime wages. Defendants remain owing Plaintiff these wages

since the commencement of Plaintiff’s employment with Defendants through Plaintiff’s 

termination date of May 2, 2020.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests liquidated damages and reasonable attorneys’ fees 

from Defendants under the FLSA and any other applicable authority, to be proven at time 

of trial for all overtime wages still owing from Plaintiff’s entire employment period with 

Defendants or as much as allowed by the FLSA along with court costs, interest, and any 

Case 0:20-cv-61193-RAR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/16/2020 Page 4 of 5
5

other relief that this Court finds reasonable under the circumstances. The Plaintiff 

demands a trial by jury.

Respectfully submitted this 16th day of June, 2020,

COANE AND ASSOCIATES, PLLC

By: /s/ Lisa Kuhlman____________

Lisa Kuhlman

Florida Bar No. 978027

Email: lisa.kuhlman@coane.com

Arthur Mandel

Florida Bar No. 22753

Email: Arthur.mandel@coane.com

1250 E. Hallandale Beach Blvd., Suite 303

Phone: (305) 538-6800

Fax: (866) 647-8296

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF 

Coane and Associates, PLLC

Bruce A. Coane

bruce.coane@gmail.com

S.D. Tex. #7205

5177 Richmond Ave., Suite 770

Houston, TX 77056

Phone: (713) 850-0066

Fax: (866) 647-8296

OF COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF

Case 0:20-cv-61193-RAR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/16/2020 Page 5 of 5