UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

MIAMI DIVISION

CASE NO.

LAZARO GORRIN,

Plaintiff,

v. 

HOLIDAY CVS, LLC

Defendant.

________________________________________/

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff, Lazaro Gorrin, by and through his undersigned attorney, files this Complaint 

against Defendant, CVS, stating as follows:

PARTIES, VENUE, AND JURISDICTION

1. This is an action to recover unpaid overtime wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act, as 

amended, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et. seq, (hereinafter “FLSA”).

2. The court has jurisdiction based on 29 U.S.C. §216(b).

3. Defendant, CVS, operates a national chain of stores and pharmacies but this Complaint 

concerns Store #10969 on Miami Beach. By way of operating this business, Defendant is 

engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce as defined in §3(r) and 

3(s) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §203(r) and 203(s).

4. Defendant has two or more employees who handle, sell, or otherwise work on goods or 

materials that have been moved in or produced for commerce.

5. Upon information and belief, Defendant exceeds the $500,000 annual gross revenue 

Case 1:22-cv-24055-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/14/2022 Page 1 of 6
threshold needed to be covered under the FLSA.

6. Plaintiff was an employee of Defendant. He was employed as Shift Training Supervisor. 

In this capacity, Plaintiff was responsible for the store at all times including other 

employees. He also helped open and close the restaurant each morning and night.

7. At all times material, Plaintiff was and is a resident of Miami-Dade County, FL.

8. This Court has jurisdiction over Defendant because they engaged in substantial business 

activity within the District, Plaintiff was employed in the District, and all of the allegations 

in this Complaint occurred in the District.

9. Venue is proper due to the unlawful employment practices alleged occurring in MiamiDade County.

FACTS

10. Plaintiff was employed with Defendant beginning July 2021 as an Shift Training 

Supervisor. His responsibilities include filling in the gaps in service when needed, 

cleaning, and to be responsible for the store, its customers, and employees. His 

employment ended October 18, 2022.

11. During his time with the company, Plaintiff has been making $18.45 per hour. This 

translates to an overtime rate of $27.68 per hour. 

12. As an hourly employee, Plaintiff cannot be exempt from the overtime laws of the FLSA.

13. Plaintiff was regularly scheduled to work 40 hours per week. As a 24 hour store, this 

schedule often included working at night approximately 3 times per week. 

14. When Plaintiff had to officially work more than 40 hours per week, he was paid overtime 

properly. However, this does not include the extra unofficial hours in which Plaintiff had 

to continue working. These unofficial hours include not being allowed to leave the store 

Case 1:22-cv-24055-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/14/2022 Page 2 of 6
for lunch breaks and receiving text messages and phone calls outside of working hours.

15. During the night shift, there was regularly only one managerial employee, like Plaintiff,

scheduled to work. Because of this shortage, the manager scheduled at that time was not 

allowed to leave the store. It is company policy to have a manager on premises at all times. 

Plaintiff would be scheduled to work 8.5 to 10 hours per shift with a lunch break. This 30 

minutes to 1 hour per shift was not compensated.

16. Because Plaintiff was not allowed to leave the store during his time off for lunch, this time 

must be compensated. Further, Plaintiff was expected to be at the ready to go back on the 

floor during this time to fulfill any managerial duties needed. He was given a radio in 

which he could always be contacted during this time.

17. Also as a manager, he had to be aware of events that happened at the store even when he 

was not there. This caused him to receive text messages and phone calls at times in which 

he was not on the clock at work.

18. Plaintiff estimates that between lunch breaks and phone calls and text messages, he 

regularly worked approximately 5 hours per week that was not compensated. Because he 

was already working 40 hours per week, this comes to 5 hours of unpaid overtime per 

week.

19. Defendants kept track of Plaintiff’s hours using a punch clock. However, he was forced to 

punch out during his lunch break and was not able to punch in and out away from the store 

to read, think about, and respond to calls and messages.

20. Plaintiff was regularly made to work in excess of 40 hours per week even if he was not 

regularly scheduled to work more than 40 hours per week. Each of his hours worked but 

not paid in excess of 40 hours requires overtime premium pay. 

Case 1:22-cv-24055-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/14/2022 Page 3 of 6
21. Plaintiff was not given appropriate additional compensation for his extra hours of work.

22. Plaintiff’s estimated owed overtime comes to $9,271.13 This is calculated at a rate of 

$27.675 per hour for 5 hours per week over 67 weeks.

23. Defendant knowingly and willfully failed to pay Plaintiff his lawfully earned wages in 

compliance with the FLSA and is liable for monetary damages. Defendant is aware of its 

staffing and policy to always have managers. Not paying Plaintiff for time required to be 

at the store is both foreseeable and avoidable. Also, Defendant should be aware that any 

time working by hourly employees is compensable including phone calls and text 

messages.

24. In determining payment policies, specifically not paying all hours worked by Plaintiff, 

Defendant did not consult an attorney. 

25. In determining payment policies, specifically not paying all hours worked by Plaintiff, 

Defendant did not consult an accountant.

26. In failing to confer with a professional such as an attorney or an accountant, Defendant has 

shown that they have willfully disregarded the FLSA. Plaintiff is thus entitled to a 3 year 

statute of limitations.

27. As Plaintiff was an hourly employee, there can be no grounds that Defendant acted in good 

faith by failing to pay overtime. Therefore, Plaintiff should be entitled to liquidated 

damages.

COUNT I

VIOLATION OF 29 U.S.C. § 207 (FAILURE TO PAY OVERTIME)

28. Plaintiff repeats and realleges Paragraphs 1 through 27 as if fully set forth herein.

29. At all times relevant, Defendant has been, and continues to be, an "employer" engaged in 

interstate commerce and/or in the production of goods for commerce, within the meaning 

Case 1:22-cv-24055-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/14/2022 Page 4 of 6
of the FLSA.

30. During his employment, Plaintiff worked in excess of forty (40) hours per week for which 

he was not compensated at the statutory rate of 1.5x his regular rate of pay for all of those 

hours worked.

31. Plaintiff was entitled to be paid at the rate of 1.5x his regular rate of pay for all hours 

worked in excess of the maximum hours (40 hours) worked per week.

32. Defendant failed to pay overtime wages to Plaintiff for hours worked in excess of forty 

hours per week.

33. By failing to compensate Plaintiff at a rate of not less than 1.5x his regular rate of pay for 

work performed in excess of forty hours in a workweek, Defendant has violated the FLSA, 

29 U.S.C. §§ 201 et seq., including 29 U.S.C. § 207(a)(1) and §215(a).

34. Should it be discovered that Defendant failed to record, report, and/or preserve records of 

hours worked by Plaintiff, Defendant will have failed in its duty as an employer prescribed 

under the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §§ 201 et seq., including 29 U.S.C. § 211(c) and § 215(a).

35. Defendant’s conduct is a willful violation of the FLSA within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 

255(a).

36. Defendant owes the Plaintiff for the hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek at 

a rate of not less than 1.5x his regular rate of pay for each of those hours.

37. Defendant failed to properly disclose or apprise Plaintiff of his rights under the FLSA.

38. Due to Defendant’s willful disregard of the FLSA and a lack of good faith in applying the 

FLSA, Plaintiff is entitled to liquidated damages and a 3 year statute of limitations.

39. Defendant knowingly and willfully failed to pay Plaintiff 1.5x his regular rate of pay for 

all hours worked in excess of forty (40) per week. Accordingly, Plaintiff has suffered 

Case 1:22-cv-24055-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/14/2022 Page 5 of 6
damages for unpaid overtime wages, plus an equal amount in liquidated damages, costs 

and reasonable attorneys' fees.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Lazaro Gorrin, respectfully requests that judgment be entered in his 

favor against Defendant as follows: 

A. Declaring that Defendant violated the overtime provisions of 29 U.S.C. § 207; 

B. Awarding Plaintiff overtime compensation; 

C. Awarding Plaintiff liquidated damages;

D. Awarding Plaintiff reasonable attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b); 

E. Awarding Plaintiff post-judgment interest; and

F. Ordering any other and further relief this Court deems to be just and proper. 

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff demands trial by jury on all issues so triable as of right by jury. 

Dated: 2/14/2022 

Respectfully submitted,

__/s/ R. Edward Rosenberg 

 R. Edward Rosenberg, Esquire 

 Fla. Bar No.: 88231 

Sorondo Rosenberg Legal PA 

1825 Ponce de Leon Blvd. #329 

Coral Gables, FL 33134 

 E: rer@sorondorosenberg.com 

T: 786.708.7550 

F: 786.204.0844 

 Attorney for Plaintiff

Case 1:22-cv-24055-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/14/2022 Page 6 of 6