UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

CASE NO. 22-cv-6213 8-Dimitrouleas/ Augustin-Birch 

SYDNEY MARIE KEEFE, 

Plaintiff, 

V. 

BRITT'S BOW WOW BOUTIQUE, INC, 

MERRI COLVARD, 

Defendants. 

I ---------------

VERDICT FORM 

Do you find from a preponderance of the evidence: 

1. That Sydney Marie Keefe, as an employee of Britt's Bow Wow Boutique, Inc., was 

either engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce or employed by 

an enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of commercial goods and was not 

properly paid overtime pursuant to the FLSA ?? 

Answer Yes or No y-e ~-

[If your answer is "No," skip questions 2-5 and proceed to question 6. 

If your answer is "Yes," go to the next question.]. 

2. That Defendant Merri Colvard exerted sufficient control over significant aspects of 

Britt's Bow Wow Boutique, Inc. 's employment policies such that she is individually liable 

for violations of the FLSA? 

Answer Yes or No U-e ~ v 

[Go to the next question.]. 

Case 0:22-cv-62138-WPD Document 101 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/29/2023 Page 1 of 4
3. That Sydney Marie Keefe was not paid at least one-and-one-half times her regular 

rate for time worked over 40 hours in a workweek," as required by law? 

Answer Yes or No t_J:C\S: 

[If your answer is "No," skip questions 4-5 and proceed to question 6. 

If your answer is "Yes," go to the next question.]. 

4. That Sydney Marie Keefe should be awarded damages? 

Answer Yes or No lJ~S 

If your answer is "Yes," in what amount? $ -. v._ ) 2 __ O· 00 . OD C/ ) 

[If your answer is "No," skip question 5 and proceed to question 6. 

If your answer is "Yes," go to the next question.]. 

5. That Defendants willfully violated the terms of the FLSA with respect to overtime 

pay? 

Answer Yes or No 'v\{S 

J 

[Go to the next question.]. 

6. That Sydney Marie Keefe engaged in fraud by submitting false timecards or false 

expense reports to Britt's Bow Wow Boutique, Inc. for paym~nt. 

Answer Yes or No 

. [If your answer to Question 6 is "Yes," Please proceed to Question 7. If your answer to 

Question 6 is "No," Please proceed to Question 8.] 

7. That Britt's Bow Wow Boutique, Inc. and Merri Colvard should be awarded 

damages for the fraud claim. 

Answer Yes or No oo 

If your answer is "Yes," in what amount? $ _____ _ 

[Proceed to Question 8]. 

Case 0:22-cv-62138-WPD Document 101 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/29/2023 Page 2 of 4
8: That Sydney Marie Keefe conve1ied funds belonging to Britt's Bow Wow 

Boutique, Inc. and Merri Colvard when she obtained payment for hours she did not work 

or 1:eimbursement for expenses she did not incur. 

Answer Yes or No no 

[If your answer to Question 8 is "Yes," Please proceed to Question 9. If your answer to 

Question 8 is "No," Please proceed to Question 10.] 

9. . That Britt's Bow Wow Boutique, Inc. and Merri Colvard should be awarded 

damages for the conversion claim. 

Answer Yes or No QO 

If your answer is "Yes," in what amount? $ _____ _ 

[Proceed to Question 1 OJ. 

10. That Sydney Marie Keefe was unjustly enriched by receiving amounts for hours 

she did not work or expenses she did not incur. 

Answer Yes or No no 

[If your answer to Question 10 is "Yes," Please proceed to Question 11. If your answer to 

Question 10 is "No," this ends your deliberations. Please have the Foreperson sign and 

date this Verdict Form.] 

11. That Britt's Britt's Bow Wow Boutique, Inc. and Merri Colvard should be 

awarded damages for the unjust enrichment claim. 

Answer Yes or No f\O 

If your answer is "Yes," in-what amount? $ _____ _ 

Case 0:22-cv-62138-WPD Document 101 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/29/2023 Page 3 of 4
So SAY WE ALL. 

Foreperson's Signature 

Case 0:22-cv-62138-WPD Document 101 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/29/2023 Page 4 of 4