Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
LYUDMYLA KONSTANTYNOVSKA et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. CARING PROFESSIONALS, INC., Defendant-Appellant.
.2022–00368
2022–04365
Jackson Lewis P.C., Melville (Noel P. Tripp of counsel), for appellant.
Virginia & Ambinder, LLP, New York (LaDonna M. Lusher of counsel), for respondents.
Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Shlomo Hagler, J.), entered January 14 and September 16, 2022, which, to the extent appealed from, granted plaintiffs' motion for class certification and approved the form and publication of notice of the class action, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Supreme Court providently granted class certification, as plaintiffs submitted evidence that they worked with at least 40 other home health aides, and that defendant systematically paid them and the putative class members for only 13 hours of their 24–hour shifts, without providing them proper meal breaks or uninterrupted periods of sleep (see Andryeyeva v. New York Health Care, Inc., 33 NY3d 152 [2019] ). Plaintiffs also submitted affidavits, testimony, and payroll records showing that they and the putative class members were not paid the minimum wage, overtime wages, or other wage benefits due to defendant's policies (see Kurovskaya v Project O.H.R. [Office for Homecare Referral], Inc., 194 AD3d 612 [1st Dept 2021] ). Claims of systemic wage violations, such as the ones presented here, are “particularly appropriate for class certification” (id. at 613, quoting Andryeyeva at 184; see also Lavrenyuk v. Life Care Servs., Inc., 198 AD3d 569 [1st Dept 2021]; Guzman v. Americare, Inc., 202 AD3d 504 [1st Dept 2022] ).
Defendant's arguments disputing the merits of plaintiffs' claims are unavailing at this juncture, as the evidence is sufficient to show that their causes of action are “neither spurious nor sham” (Bloom v. Cunard Line, 76 A.D.2d 237, 241 [1st Dept 1980] ). The differing amounts of damages to which each individual class member may be entitled does not undermine commonality or weigh substantially against class certification (see Brown v Mahdessian, 206 AD3d 511, 512 [1st Dept 2022] ).
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: Index No. 159883 /16
Decided: April 04, 2023
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)