UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT PIERCE DIVISION

EMMANUEL MATHIS, 

Plaintiff,

vs.

ECP EVENT RENTALS AND 

DESIGN, INC., a Florida 

Profit Corporation,

Defendant.

 /

CASE NO.: 

COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

COMES NOW the Plaintiff, EMMANUEL MATHIS (“Plaintiff”), by and 

through his undersigned counsel, and hereby files this Complaint against the 

Defendant, ECP EVENT RENTALS AND DESIGN, INC. (“Defendant”), a 

Florida Profit Corporation, for unpaid overtime compensation and other relief 

under the Fair Labor Standards Act, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) (the 

“FLSA”), and alleges as follows: 

INTRODUCTION

1. This is an action by the Plaintiff against his previous employer for 

unpaid overtime wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”). 

Plaintiff seeks damages, reasonable attorney’s fees, and other relief under the 

Fair Labor Standards Act, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) (the “FLSA”). 

Case 2:22-cv-14332-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/20/2022 Page 1 of 8
2

JURISDICTION

2. This action arises under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. 

§210, et. seq. Jurisdiction is proper in this court pursuant 29 U.S.C. § 216.

VENUE

3. The venue of this Court over this controversy is proper based upon 

the claim arising in St. Lucie County, Florida.

PARTIES

4. Plaintiff worked as a design team member for Defendant in 

Florida.

5. Plaintiff was an employee of the Defendant within the last three 

(3) years, from approximately September 2021 through December 2021.

6. Defendant is an event equipment rental and design company in 

Port St. Lucie, Florida.

FLSA ENTERPRISE COVERAGE

7. At all material times, Defendant was an enterprise subject to the 

FLSA’s provision on minimum wage and overtime wages.

8. At all times material hereto, Defendant was and is an enterprise 

covered by the FLSA pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 203(s)(1)(A).

9. At all material times, Defendant was an enterprise engaged in 

commerce or in the production of goods for commerce, in that said enterprise 

had at least two employees engaged in commerce or in the production of goods 

Case 2:22-cv-14332-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/20/2022 Page 2 of 8
3

for commerce, or employees handling, selling, or otherwise working on goods 

or materials that have been moved in or produced for commerce by any person

(i.e. business equipment, telephones, computers, pens, and paper).

10. Defendant’s employees ran credit card transactions which engaged 

in interstate commerce, handling or otherwise working with materials that have 

been moved in or produced for interstate commerce (i.e. telephones, computers, 

pens, and paper). 

11. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff was an “employee” of 

Defendant within the meaning of FLSA.

12. At all times material hereto, Defendant was and continues to be 

an “employer” within the meaning of the FLSA.

13. Based upon information and belief, the annual gross revenue of 

Defendant was in excess of $500,000.00 per annum during the relevant time 

period.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

14. Plaintiff was employed with Defendant from approximately 

September 2021 through December 2021.

15. Plaintiff worked as a “design team member.”

16. Plaintiff’s job duties included, but were not limited to transporting 

equipment and setting up events, for Defendant.

Case 2:22-cv-14332-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/20/2022 Page 3 of 8
4

17. Plaintiff was paid at a rate of $16.00 per hour throughout his 

employment.

18. Plaintiff was a full-time employee.

19. Plaintiff did not have any authority to hire employees. 

20. Plaintiff did not have any authority to fire employees. 

21. Plaintiff did not exercise independent discretion and independent 

judgment with respect to matters of significance.

22. Plaintiff should have been classified as a non-exempt employee by 

Defendant.

23. Plaintiff was assigned work by supervisors.

24. Plaintiff was assigned a set schedule by supervisors

25. During Plaintiff’s employment, Plaintiff worked in excess of forty 

(40) hours per work week during one or more work weeks. 

26. When Plaintiff worked overtime hours, he worked an average of 

fifteen (15) hours over 40 hours per week. 

27. Defendant knew or should have known of Plaintiff’s schedule and 

hours worked each week. 

28. Plaintiff was eligible to be paid overtime pay at time and one half

his regular rate.

29. Plaintiff was not compensated at time-and-one-half for all hours 

worked in excess of forty (40) hours in a workweek.

Case 2:22-cv-14332-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/20/2022 Page 4 of 8
5

30. Due to this pay policy or practice by the Defendant, Plaintiff was 

never paid overtime compensation for any of the overtime hours worked.

31. Upon information and belief, the records, to the extent any exist, 

concerning the number of hours worked and amounts paid to Plaintiff are in the 

possession and custody of the Defendant.

32. Defendant’s failure and/or refusal to properly compensate Plaintiff 

at the rates and amounts required by the FLSA were willful.

33. During his employment, Plaintiff complained to Defendant 

regarding how he was paid.

34. Defendant stated that they did not pay overtime

35. Defendant did not investigate Plaintiff’s claims.

36. Defendant terminated Plaintiff’s employment in December 2021.

COUNT I - RECOVERY OF OVERTIME COMPENSATION

37. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates paragraphs 1-36 as if fully set 

forth herein.

38. Plaintiff regularly worked in excess of forty (40) hours per week.

39. Plaintiff was not properly compensated at the statutory rate of one 

and one-half times Plaintiff’s regular rate of pay for the hours he worked in 

excess of forty (40) hours each workweek.

40. Plaintiff was and is entitled to be paid at the statutory rate of 

overtime calculation for those hours worked in excess of forty (40) hours.

Case 2:22-cv-14332-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/20/2022 Page 5 of 8
6

41. At all times material hereto, Defendant failed, and continues to fail, 

to maintain proper time records as mandated by the FLSA.

42. Defendant’s actions were willful and/or showed reckless disregard 

for the provisions of the FLSA as evidenced by its failure to compensate Plaintiff 

for overtime for all hours worked in excess of forty (40) hours per weeks when 

they knew, or should have known, such was, and is due.

43. Defendant failed to properly disclose or apprise Plaintiff’s rights 

under the FLSA.

44. Due to the intentional, willful, and unlawful acts of Defendant, 

Plaintiff suffered and continues to suffer damages and lost compensation for time 

worked over forty (40) hours per week, plus liquidated damages.

45. Plaintiff is entitled to an award of reasonable attorney’s fees and 

costs pursuant to 29 U.S.C. §216(b).

46. At all times material hereto, Defendant failed to comply with Title 

29 and United States Department of Labor Regulations, 29 C.F.R. §§516.2 and 

516.4, with respect to the Plaintiff by virtue of the management policy, plan, or 

decision that intentionally provided for the compensation of less than time-andone-half for overtime hours worked.

47. Based upon information and belief, Plaintiff is/was not paid proper 

overtime for hours worked in excess of forty (40) in one or more workweeks, 

because Defendant failed to properly pay Plaintiff proper overtime wages.

Case 2:22-cv-14332-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/20/2022 Page 6 of 8
7

48. Plaintiff demands a trial by jury.

49. Defendant violated Title 29 U.S.C. §207 for the relevant period of 

time in that:

a. Plaintiff worked in excess of forty (40) hours per week for the 

period of employment with Defendant;

b. No payments, and provisions for payment, have been made by 

Defendant to properly compensate Plaintiff at the statutory rate of one and 

one-half times Plaintiff’s regular rate for those hours worked in excess of 

forty (40) hours per work week as provided by the FLSA; and

c. Defendant failed to maintain proper time records as 

mandated by the FLSA.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that judgment be entered in 

his favor against Defendant: awarding Plaintiff overtime compensation in the 

amount due for Plaintiff’s time worked in excess of forty (40) hours per work 

week while employed; an equal amount in liquidated damages; awarding 

Plaintiff pre-judgment and/or post-judgment interest; an award of costs and 

expenses of this action together with reasonable attorneys’ and expert fees, and 

any other further relief the Court deems just and proper.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff demands a jury trial on all issues so triable against Defendant.

DATED this __20th____ day of September, 2022.

Case 2:22-cv-14332-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/20/2022 Page 7 of 8
8

Respectfully submitted,

s/ Edward W. Wimp

Edward W. Wimp, Esquire – LEAD COUNSEL

FBN: 1015586

Email: ewimp@theleachfirm.com

Anthony Hall, Esquire

FBN: 0040924

Email: ahall@theleachfirm.com

THE LEACH FIRM, P.A.

631 S. Orlando Ave., Suite 300

Winter Park, FL 32789

Telephone: (407) 574-4999

Facsimile: (833) 813-7513

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Case 2:22-cv-14332-AMC Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/20/2022 Page 8 of 8