Page 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.: 

ADALBERTO SOTO GARAVIDEZ

 Plaintiff,

vs.

EURO WINES TRADING INC,

A Florida Profit Corporation d/b/a EURO WINES, 

and GLORIA ALFONSO, individually,

 Defendants.

________________________________________/

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff ADALBERTO SOTO GARAVIDEZ (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) by and through his

undersigned attorney, hereby sues Defendants EURO WINES TRADING INC, a Florida Profit 

Corporation doing business as EURO WINES, (hereinafter “Euro Wines”) and GLORIA 

ALFONSO, individually (hereinafter “Alfonso”) (collectively “Defendants”) and states as 

follows:

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. This is an action for damages and other relief for unpaid overtime committed by Defendants 

pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 201, et seq. (hereinafter the “Fair 

Labor Standards Act”, the “FLSA” or the “Act”).

2. Jurisdiction is conferred upon this Court pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), 28 U.S.C. § 1331.

3. Venue is proper for the United States Court for the Southern District of Florida because 

Plaintiff was employed in the Southern District of Florida by Defendants, which at all material 

times conducted, and continues to conduct, business in the Southern District of Florida, and 

Case 1:22-cv-24061-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/14/2022 Page 1 of 8
Page 2

because the acts that give rise to Plaintiff’s claims occurred within the Southern District of 

Florida and because Defendants are subject to personal jurisdiction there.

PARTIES

4. Plaintiff at all times pertinent to this complaint resided within the Southern District of 

Florida. Plaintiff is over the age of eighteen and otherwise sui juris. 

5. During all times relevant to this Complaint, Plaintiff was employed by Defendants from July 

14, 2022, until on or about October 14, 2022, as a deliveryman. Plaintiff was therefore an 

employee as defined by 29 U.S.C. § 203(e).

6. Euro Wines is a Florida for Profit Corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of 

the laws of Florida and was registered to do business within Florida. Euro Wines has its 

principal place of business in Miami, Florida. Euro Wines had, at all times material hereto, 

conducted substantial and continuous business within the Southern District of Florida, and is 

subject to the laws of the United States and the State of Florida.

7. Euro Wines is an “employer” as defined by 29 U.S.C. § 203(d) and (s)(1), in that it has 

employees engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce or that has 

employees handling, selling, or otherwise working on goods or materials that have been 

moved in or produced for commerce by any person.

8. Specifically, Euro Wines is in the business of wine wholesale. Euro Wines sold, marketed, or 

handled goods and materials to customers throughout the United States; provided services for 

goods sold and transported from across state lines; used telephonic transmissions traversing 

state lines in the ordinary course of business; transmitted funds outside the state of Florida; 

and otherwise regularly engaged in interstate commerce. 

Case 1:22-cv-24061-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/14/2022 Page 2 of 8
Page 3

9. At all times material to this Complaint, Euro Wines has had two (2) or more employees who 

have regularly sold, handled, or otherwise worked on goods and/or material that have been 

moved in or produced for commerce. 

10. Euro Wines upon knowledge and belief, has had gross revenue which exceeds $500,000 for 

each of the past three (3) years and utilizes goods in the flow of commerce across state lines.

11. Defendant Alfonso is the owner and/or manager, and exercised operational control over the 

activities of, corporate Defendant, Euro Wines.

12. Defendant Alfonso, acted directly in the interest of her company, Euro Wines. Upon all 

available information, Alfonso, controlled the manner in which Plaintiff performed his work, 

and the pay he was to receive. 

13. All Defendants were “employers” of Plaintiff as the term is defined under 29 U.S.C. § 203(d). 

14. All other conditions precedent to this action have been performed or have been waived. 

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL COUNTS

15. Plaintiff is a non-exempt employee of Defendants and is subject to the payroll practices and 

procedures set forth hereinafter, and who worked more than forty (40) hours during one of 

more workweeks within three (3) years of the filing of this complaint.

16. Plaintiff began working for Defendants on July 14, 2022, through October 14, 2022, as a

deliveryman. His primary duties were driving the delivery truck within the state of Florida, 

load and unload the truck, and other manual labor.

17. Based on the information currently available to Plaintiff, he was paid a salary of 

$1,500.00/biweekly regardless of the hours he worked. 

Case 1:22-cv-24061-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/14/2022 Page 3 of 8
Page 4

18. During the course of his employment, Plaintiff regularly worked at least twelve (12) to fourteen 

(14) hours/day at least four (4) days a week. Plaintiff, on occasion, would also work on 

Mondays and Fridays. 

19. At all times pertinent to this action, Defendants failed to comply with 29 U.S.C. §§ 201 – 219 

in that Plaintiff performed services for Defendants for which no provision was made to 

properly pay for those hours worked over forty (40) in a given workweek.

20. Furthermore, Defendants routinely made improper deductions from Plaintiff’s wages. 

21. As a result of these deductions, there were times when Defendants failed to issue payment of 

the required minimum hourly wage for some of the hours worked by Plaintiff. 

22. Defendants and their representatives knew that Plaintiff was working overtime, and that federal 

law requires employees to be compensated at time and one-half per hour for overtime pay.

23. Defendants maintained complete control over the hours Plaintiff worked and the pay he was 

to receive. 

24. Plaintiff has retained the undersigned firm to prosecute this action on his behalf and has agreed 

to pay it a reasonable fee for its services.

25. Plaintiff is entitled to his reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs if he is the prevailing party in 

this action.

COUNT I

VIOLATION OF FLSA/OVERTIME against EURO WINES

26. Plaintiff, re-alleges and reaffirms paragraphs 1 through 25 as if fully set forth herein.

27. This action is brought by Plaintiff to recover from Defendant unpaid overtime compensation, 

as well as an additional amount as liquidated damages, costs, and reasonable attorney’s fees 

under the provisions of 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., 29 U.S.C. § 207 (a)(1) states “[n]o employer 

Case 1:22-cv-24061-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/14/2022 Page 4 of 8
Page 5

shall employ any of his employees... for a work week longer than 40 hours unless such 

employee receives compensation for his employment in excess of the hours above-specified at 

a rate not less than one and a half times the regular rate at which he is employed.”

28. Since the commencement of Plaintiff’s employment, EURO WINES has willfully violated the 

provisions of § 7 of the FLSA [29 U.S.C. § 207] by having employees working for longer than 

forty (40) hours without properly compensating them for all hours overtime hours at a rate not 

less than one- and one-half times their regular rate.

29. Specifically, throughout his employment Plaintiff worked over forty (40) hours during some 

of the workweeks in which he was employed. 

30. Euro Wines is and was, during all times hereafter mentioned, an enterprise 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). Euro Wines’ business activities involve those to which 

the Fair Labor Standards Act applies. 

31. Plaintiff was not exempted from the overtime provision of the Act pursuant to the provisions 

of the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 213(a), in that he was neither a bona fide executive, administrative, or 

professional employee. Plaintiff performed duties such as transporting goods for commerce, 

loading and unloading goods, disposing of trash, and did not have decision-making authority. 

Plaintiff drove the company vehicle, Ford van, which upon information and belief weighs 

under 10,000 pounds, thus qualifying for the small vehicle exception under the FLSA.

32. Euro Wines has knowingly and willfully failed to pay Plaintiff at time and one half of his 

regular rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of forty (40) per week between the relevant 

time period.

Case 1:22-cv-24061-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/14/2022 Page 5 of 8
Page 6

33. By reason of the said intentional, willful, and unlawful acts of Euro Wines, Plaintiff has 

suffered damages plus incurring costs and reasonable attorneys' fees.

34. Plaintiff seeks to recover for unpaid wages accumulated within three (3) years of the filing of 

this complaint.

35. As a result of Euro Wines’ willful violations of the Act, Plaintiff is entitled to liquidated 

damages.

36. Plaintiff has retained the undersigned counsel to represent he in this action, and pursuant to 

29 U.S.C. § 216(b), Plaintiff is entitled to recover all reasonable attorneys' fees and costs 

incurred in this action from Euro Wines.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays for the following relief against EURO WINES:

A. Adjudge and decree that Defendant has violated the FLSA and has done so willfully, 

intentionally and with reckless disregard for Plaintiff’s rights;

B. Award Plaintiff actual damages in the amount shown to be due for overtime 

compensation for hours worked in excess of forty (40) weekly, with interest; and

C. Award Plaintiff an equal amount in double damages/liquidated damages; and

D. Award Plaintiff the costs of this action, together with a reasonable attorneys' fees; and

E. Grant Plaintiff such additional relief as the Court deems just and proper under the 

circumstances.

COUNT II

VIOLATION OF FLSA/OVERTIME against GLORIA ALFONSO

37. Plaintiff, re-alleges and reaffirms paragraphs 1 through 25 as if fully set forth herein.

38. At the times mentioned, Defendant Alfonso was, and is now, a corporate officer of corporate 

Defendant, Euro Wines.

Case 1:22-cv-24061-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/14/2022 Page 6 of 8
Page 7

39. Alfonso was an employer of Plaintiff within the meaning of Section 3(d) of the Fair Labor 

Standards Act [29 U.S.C. § 203(d)], in that Alfonso acted directly in the interests of Euro 

Wines in relation to its employees including Plaintiff. 

40. Specifically, Alfonso is the owner of Euro Wines and supervised Plaintiff, determined 

company payroll decisions, and maintained the right to hire and fire Plaintiff during all 

pertinent times hereto.

41. Alfonso had operational control of the business and is thus jointly liable for Plaintiff’s 

damages.

42. Defendant Alfonso willfully and intentionally refused to properly pay Plaintiff overtime wages 

as required by the law of the United States as set forth above and remains owing Plaintiff these 

wages since the commencement of Plaintiff’s employment with Defendants as set forth above. 

43. By reason of the said intentional, willful and unlawful acts of Alfonso, Plaintiff has suffered 

damages plus incurring costs and reasonable attorneys' fees.

44. As a result of willful violations of the Act, Plaintiff is entitled to liquidated damages.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays for the following relief against Defendant GLORIA 

ALFONSO: 

A. Adjudge and decree that has violated the FLSA and has done so willfully, intentionally 

and with reckless disregard for Plaintiff’s rights;

B. Award Plaintiff actual damages in the amount shown to be due for unpaid overtime 

compensation for hours worked in excess of forty (40) weekly, with interest; and

C. Award Plaintiff an equal amount in double damages/liquidated damages; and

D. Award Plaintiff the costs of this action, together with a reasonable attorneys' fees; and

E. Grant Plaintiff such additional relief as the Court deems just and proper under the 

Case 1:22-cv-24061-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/14/2022 Page 7 of 8
Page 8

circumstances.

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff, ADALBERTO SOTO demands trial by jury on all issues and all counts of this Complaint 

so triable as a matter of right.

Dated: December 14, 2022

PEREGONZA THE ATTORNEYS, PLLC

5201 Blue Lagoon Drive, 

Suite 290

Miami, FL 33126

Tel. (786) 650-0202

Fax. (786) 650-0200

By: /s/ Nathaly Saavedra

Nathaly Saavedra, Esq. 

Fla. Bar No. 118315

Email: nathaly@peregonza.com

Juan J. Perez, Esq. 

Fla. Bar No. 115784

Email: juan@peregonza.com

Jocelyn R. Rocha, Esq. 

Fla. Bar No. 1039302

Email: jocelyn@peregonza.com

Case 1:22-cv-24061-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/14/2022 Page 8 of 8