Labreche v. Brouillette

OCR transcription for search; preserved printed pages are authoritative

Case 1:21-cv-00277-JJM-LDA Document 29 Filed 08/17/22 Page 1of 3 PagelD #:
<pagelD>

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND

JOHN LABRECHE,
Plaintiff,

Vv.
RICHARD BROUILLETTE; 127 C.d.No. 20:2 77aELDA
NORWOOD ASSOCIATES, LLC; 176
NARRAGANSETT ASSOCIATES,
LLC,

Defendants.

Ne ee ee ee ee

ORDER

John Labreche alleges in his Amended Complaint (ECF No. 20) that he worked
as a property manager for Richard Brouillette at 122 Norwood Avenue, Cranston, R_I.
from 1990 ~ 2003; for 122 Norwood Associates, LLC at 122 Norwood Avenue.
Cranston, R.I. from 2003 — 2020; and for Narragansett Associates, LLC at 176/178
Narragansett Avenue, Riverside, R.I. from 2005 — 2017. He alleges that his
employers failed or refused to pay him for his work at the properties for all his
compensable hours during many weeks. ECF No, 20 at 8, 4" 11-12. He also alleges
that Mr. Brouilletto agreed that if Mr. Labreche became property manager of the
Norwood Avenue property, that Mr, Brouillette would sell him that property ata
reduced prico, fd at Stats,

Mr. Labrocho's Amondod Complaint contains five eounta® Count One
violition oF REG, §28° 14 19.2, the Rhode Ishind Payment of Wages et CRIPWAY:

Commt Two Breach of Contact Count Phveo Unjust Mnvtehment! Count our

AUTHENTICATED
U.S. GOVERNMENT
INFORMATION

GPO.

Case 1:21-cv-00277-JJM-LDA Document 29 Filed 08/17/22 Page 2 of 3 PagelD #:

<pagelD>

Quantum Meruit; and Count Five — Imposition of Constructive Trust. Defendants

move to dismiss: (1) in Count One, any wages owed before June 30, 2018 because of

the three-year statute of limitations; (2) Counts Two, Three, and Four because the

RIPWA is the sole statutory remedy for lost wages; and (3) Count 5 because a

constructive trust is a remedy, not a cause of action. ECF No. 24.

The issues raised by the parties are very straightforward, so the Court

summarily ORDERS as follows:

1,

The Court dismisses Counts Three and Four because the RIPWA is the sole
means for the recovery of wages owed. Bisbano v. Strine Printing Co., 135 A.3d
1202, 1209 (R.I. 2016). The same holds true if a plaintiff tries to bring their
request for wages as a claim for unjust enrichment or quantum meruit.

The Court limits Count One to claims for wages after June 30, 2018, because
the RIPWA limits any claim to those “commenced within three (3) years after
the cause of action accrued.” R.I. Gen. Laws §28—14-19.2(g).

The Court limits Count Two to the claim for an alleged breach of contract
stemming from the agreement with Mr. Brouillette to allow him to purchase
the Norwood Avenue property at a lower price.

Because imposition of a constructive trust is a remedy, not a cause of action,
the Court dismisses Count Five. However, Mr. Labreche may seek such a
remedy for violating that promise under Count Two.

The Court denies as moot Defendants’ Motion to Strike. ECF No. 26.

In summary, the Court DISMISSES Counts Three, FouT, and Five; LIMITS
Count One to wages earned from June 30, 2018 to the present; LIMITS Count Two to
the claim for a breach of contract against Mr. Brouillette rooted in their agreement
on the Norwood Avenue property; DISMISSES Defendant Narragansett Associates,
LLC.; and DENIES as MOOT Defendants' Motion to St1'ike. ECF No. 26.
__
I
_
 T
_
I
_
S S0t;4RE)A C
John J. McConnell, Jr.
Chief United States District Judge
August 17, 2022
3
Case 1:21-cv-00277-JJM-LDA Document 29 Filed 08/17/22 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:
<pageID>