Defense of Employers in FLSA and NY Labor Law

Defending New York and Out-of-State Employers Against Overtime, Unpaid Wage, and Employment Compensation Lawsuits

When an employee or former employee files a lawsuit alleging unpaid wages, overtime violations, or other employment compensation claims, the employer faces more than the prospect of a financial judgment. Defending these lawsuits can require substantial expenditures of time, legal fees, and business resources, even when the claims lack merit.

Our law firm represents New York businesses and out-of-state employers facing litigation under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), New York Labor Law (NYLL), and related wage-and-hour laws.

Whether your company is headquartered in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Florida, or elsewhere in the United States, a lawsuit involving employees who work in New York may expose your business to New York wage-and-hour claims. Conversely, a New York-based employer sued by an employee working in another state may have significant defenses concerning which laws apply and where the lawsuit can properly proceed.

Our approach is designed to accomplish three objectives: defend the employer vigorously, identify opportunities to dismiss or substantially narrow the claims early in the litigation, and avoid unnecessary legal expenses.

Aggressive Defense of FLSA and New York Labor Law Lawsuits

The federal Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., establishes minimum wage, overtime, and other compensation requirements for covered employment. New York Labor Law establishes additional requirements, which in some circumstances are more demanding than federal law.

An employer may be sued under one statute or both. Employees may seek unpaid compensation, liquidated damages, statutory penalties, interest, and attorneys’ fees. These claims may also be asserted against individual corporate officers, owners, or managers.

We defend employers against claims involving:

• Unpaid overtime: Allegations that employees worked more than 40 hours per week without legally required overtime compensation.
• Minimum wage violations: Claims involving federal, New York State, or applicable local wage requirements.
• Off-the-clock work: Allegedly unpaid work before or after shifts, during meal periods, or outside regular working hours.
• Employee misclassification: Disputes over exempt and nonexempt employment status or independent-contractor relationships.
• Unpaid commissions and bonuses: Claims concerning incentive compensation, commissions, discretionary bonuses, and employment agreements.
• Wage notices and wage statements: Alleged violations of New York Labor Law § 195.
• Spread-of-hours pay, tip credits, and unlawful deductions: Claims arising under New York’s wage regulations.
• Wage payment frequency: Allegations involving delayed wages or violations of applicable payment schedules.
• Individual liability: Attempts to hold business owners, officers, or managers personally responsible for alleged wage violations.
• Collective and class actions: Lawsuits seeking recovery on behalf of multiple current or former employees.

Representing Out-of-State Employers Sued by New York Employees

A company does not have to be incorporated or headquartered in New York to face a lawsuit under New York Labor Law.

Businesses based in New Jersey, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Florida, California, and other states may employ individuals who physically work in New York. Under appropriate circumstances, those employment relationships may be subject to New York’s wage-and-hour requirements.

For example, an out-of-state company employing a salesperson, remote employee, manager, or service worker in New York may face claims under the FLSA and NYLL, even if the company’s principal offices and payroll operations are located elsewhere.

In Aybar v. Aybar, 37 N.Y.3d 274 (2021), the New York Court of Appeals held that a foreign corporation does not consent to general personal jurisdiction in New York merely by registering to do business in the state and designating an agent for service of process.

Defending New York Employers Sued by Employees Working Outside New York

The reverse situation presents equally important considerations.

A company headquartered in New York may employ individuals who live and work in New Jersey, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Florida, or other states. Those employees may nevertheless commence lawsuits asserting violations of New York Labor Law.

But New York Labor Law does not automatically govern every employment relationship simply because the employer is based in New York.

The location where an employee actually performs work may be critical to determining which state’s wage laws apply.

In Rodriguez v. KGA Inc., 155 A.D.3d 452 (1st Dep’t 2017), the Appellate Division, First Department, affirmed dismissal of New York Labor Law claims based upon work performed exclusively outside New York. The court explained that the relevant statutory provisions did not provide for extraterritorial application.

Similarly, in Kingston v. International Business Machines Corp., 187 A.D.3d 578 (1st Dep’t 2020), the First Department affirmed dismissal of a New York Labor Law retaliation claim involving a Texas-based employee whose work was performed predominantly outside New York, notwithstanding his connections with New York-based supervisors and clients.

More recently, in Magner v. Alvanon, Inc., No. 24-cv-9190 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 26, 2026), a federal district court dismissed significant portions of an employee’s New York Labor Law claims arising from work performed remotely in Pennsylvania, although certain claims relating to earlier New York employment and separate common-law theories remained.

These decisions provide important potential defenses for New York businesses facing wage-and-hour claims by employees working beyond the state’s borders.

Our Initial Priority: Can the Lawsuit Be Dismissed Early?

We believe that employers should not automatically be subjected to one or two years of expensive litigation without first examining whether the lawsuit can be dismissed at the outset.

One of our first priorities upon being retained is to investigate the feasibility of filing a motion to dismiss the complaint, either in its entirety or with respect to particular causes of action or defendants.

We carefully examine the complaint to determine whether the plaintiff has alleged facts sufficient to establish a legally actionable wage claim.

Two important Second Circuit decisions illustrate the value of this analysis.

In Lundy v. Catholic Health System of Long Island Inc., 711 F.3d 106 (2d Cir. 2013), the federal appellate court affirmed dismissal of FLSA overtime claims where the plaintiffs failed to plead sufficient facts establishing uncompensated work exceeding 40 hours in a given workweek. The court also affirmed dismissal of corresponding NYLL overtime claims.

Similarly, in Dejesus v. HF Management Services, LLC, 726 F.3d 85 (2d Cir. 2013), the Second Circuit affirmed dismissal of an insufficiently pleaded overtime claim, explaining that simply repeating statutory language without meaningful factual support does not satisfy federal pleading requirements.

Not every case warrants a pre-answer motion. Indeed, an unnecessary motion can increase rather than reduce litigation costs. Our objective is therefore to determine whether a motion presents a realistic opportunity for a favorable outcome before substantial resources are spent on discovery, depositions, expert witnesses, and trial preparation.

An effective defense begins with asking whether the litigation can be ended—or meaningfully reduced—before it becomes unnecessarily expensive.

Additional Defenses Recognized by Federal and New York Courts

The FLSA and NYLL are designed to protect workers, but they do not eliminate an employer’s right to challenge unsupported allegations, contest liability, or invoke statutory defenses.

Statutes of Limitations and Willfulness

Most FLSA wage claims are governed by a two-year limitations period, extended to three years for willful violations.

In Whiteside v. Hover-Davis, Inc., 995 F.3d 315 (2d Cir. 2021), the Second Circuit affirmed dismissal of a time-barred FLSA claim where the plaintiff failed to plead facts supporting the assertion that the employer’s conduct was willful.

This decision illustrates how a limitations defense may provide a basis for early dismissal, although New York Labor Law generally provides a longer limitations period for wage claims.

Statutory Wage Notice and Wage Statement Damages

Employees sometimes seek substantial statutory damages for alleged wage notice or wage statement violations, even where there is little dispute over the wages actually paid.

Overtime Exemptions and Independent Contractors

Some wage lawsuits turn on whether the plaintiff was legally entitled to overtime compensation or qualified as an employee in the first place.

Disputes Over Bonuses and Commissions

New York law also recognizes distinctions among various forms of employee compensation.

We examine compensation arrangements, written agreements, payroll records, and relevant legal authorities to determine whether an unpaid compensation claim is sustainable.

Avoiding the Financial Burden of Prolonged Litigation

Defending an FLSA or New York Labor Law lawsuit can become expensive long before the parties reach trial.

Employers may confront extensive document requests, electronic discovery, depositions, motions, settlement conferences, and demands for substantial attorneys’ fees.

In some cases, the cost of defending the action may begin to approach—or even exceed—the amount originally claimed by the employee.

We recognize this economic reality.

Our approach is to assess potential liability early, identify dispositive or issue-narrowing legal defenses, and develop a litigation strategy proportional to the amount genuinely at stake.

Where an early motion to dismiss is appropriate, we examine that option promptly. Where factual disputes make dismissal unavailable, we evaluate targeted discovery, summary judgment, and other opportunities to narrow the proceedings.

And where a negotiated resolution serves the employer’s business interests, we pursue that option from a position informed by the strengths and weaknesses of the case.

Our goal is not to prolong litigation for its own sake. It is to achieve an effective defense while limiting unnecessary expense and disruption.

Defense of Individual, Collective, and Class Action Wage Claims

Wage-and-hour lawsuits are not always limited to a single employee.

Under the FLSA, employees may seek to proceed collectively with other similarly situated workers. New York Labor Law claims may also be asserted through proposed class actions.

Defending Employers in New York State and Federal Courts

Our wage-and-hour defense practice is directed toward businesses facing litigation involving New York, whether those businesses are headquartered within the state or elsewhere.

We address claims brought in New York State Supreme Court and in federal courts, including the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York, as well as matters arising in other New York federal judicial districts where appropriate.

For employers operating across state lines, we also examine the interaction between federal law, New York law, and the potentially applicable laws of other states.

We understand that employers cannot simply suspend their operations while a lawsuit proceeds. Business owners must continue managing employees, serving customers, and meeting financial obligations.

Their legal representation should reflect those realities.

Before allowing a wage-and-hour lawsuit to become a prolonged and expensive legal battle, find out whether the claims can be dismissed, narrowed, or resolved efficiently.

Contact our firm to discuss your case and learn how we approach the defense of employers in FLSA and New York Labor Law litigation. We practice mainly in the five boroughs of the City of New York, but all throughout New York in federal court and collar counties to the City and Long Island.