Tejada v. Ottomanelli's Cafe Franchising Corp. et al

Filing 17

RULE 26 DISCLOSURE.Document filed by Ottomanelli's Cafe Franchising Corp..(Breslow, Allen)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
WILLIAM TEJADA and EDUARDO ROSA, Individually and on
Behalf of All Other Past and Present Similarly Situated
Employees,
Plaintiffs,

CASE NUMBER:

11 CV 2112

-against-

DEFENDANTS' RULE 26(a)(1)

INITIAL DISCLOSURES

onOMANELLI'S CAFE FRANCHISING CORP . d/b/a
OTTOMANELLI BROTHERS NY GRILL, NICOLO onOMANELLI
and JOSEPH OTTOMANELLI,
Defendants.

Defendants,

OTTOMANELLI'S

CAFE'

FRANCHISING

CORP.

d/b/a

onOMANELLI

BROTHERS NY GRILL, (Ottomanell's Cafe), NICOLO OTTOMAI'JELLI and JOSEPH OTTOMANELLI,
through their attorney, the Law Office of Allen B. Breslow, submit this disclosure statement
pursuant to Rule 26(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure .

Please be advised that

pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26(e), Defendants reserve their right to
supplement the disclosures made herein in anticipation of further investigation and the
discovery process:

1.

POTENTIAL WITNESSES.

The names of potential witnesses and their contact

information, if known are as follows:

1.

The named Defendant Nicolo Ottomanelli.

Defendant should only be

contacted through his attorney, the Law Office of Allen B. Breslow.
2.

The named Plaintiff William Tejada . Plaintiff should only be contacted

through his attorney, Law Office of William Cafaro.

3.

The named Plaintiff Eduardo Rosa.

Plaintiff should only be contacted

through his attorney, Law Office of William Cafaro.
2.

DOCUMENTS.

Whatever documents and information relevant to Plaintiffs'

claims in this action exist are in the possession, custody and control of either the Plaintiffs or
the Defendants.
3.

DAMAGES. Plaintiff purports to proceed via a Collective Action under the Fair

Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and a Class Action pursuant to New York State Labor Law ("NYLL").
The amount of damages, if any, of each individual Plaintiff will be ascertained at trial. Damages,
if any, are calculated based upon the duration of the employment of each individual employee,
the individual employee's workweek schedule and the individual employee's rate of pay.
Plaintiffs ' claim that they have been underpaid and, that they have not received either
minimum wages or overtime . Defendants contend that the known Plaintiff William Tejada was
an exempt employee and is not entitled to any damages because he was paid all of the
amounts owed to him. It is Defendants' contention that all employees who were hourly and
not exempt were paid in accordance with FLSA and NYLL and that no damages are due to any of
them. Since the number of employees is exceedingly small, Defendants further contend that
this matter represents individual claims owed and should not be pursued as either a class
action or a collective action .
Plaintiffs additionally seek pre and post judgment interest and reasonable attorneys'
fees, which would only be payable in the event Plaintiffs recover any sums from the
Defendants .

Page 2 of 3

4.

INSURANCE AGREEMENTS. Defendants have no insurance agreements relevant

to this case.

Dated : Commack, New York
June 10, 2011

William Cafaro, Esq.
Law Office of William Cafaro
19 West 44th Street, Suite 1500
l\Jew York, l\Jew York 10036

212-583-7400
Attorney for Plaintiff

Page 3 of 3