A New York appellate court has upheld a lower court's decision to certify a class of landscaping workers who claim they were not paid the prevailing wages required by law. This ruling affects numerous employees of Dragonetti Bros. Landscaping Nursery & Florist, Inc. who worked on public projects and could lead to significant changes in how landscaping companies handle wage payments.
The case, Stabile v. Dragonetti Bros. Landscaping Nursery & Florist, Inc., was decided by the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York on October 20, 2026. The court's decision came after the workers filed a motion for class certification, arguing that they had been systematically denied fair wages for their labor. The ruling is significant as it reinforces the rights of workers in the landscaping industry, particularly those involved in public works projects.
Background
The dispute in this case centers around Jesse Stabile, the plaintiff and a former employee of Dragonetti Bros. Landscaping Nursery & Florist, Inc., and the company itself, which is the defendant. Stabile and other workers alleged that they were not compensated according to the prevailing wage laws while performing tree pruning, cutting, and other related construction-like tasks on public works projects.
The case reached the appellate court after the Supreme Court in New York County, under Justice Kathleen Waterman-Marshall, granted the workers' motion for class certification on September 18, 2025. The workers argued that they shared common legal and factual questions regarding their wage claims, which warranted class treatment. The defendants, however, contended that the nature of landscaping work required individual assessments, which they believed would complicate class certification.
The Ruling
The appellate court unanimously affirmed the lower court's decision to grant class certification. The court ruled that the lower court had exercised its discretion appropriately, stating, "The worker affirmations submitted in support of the motion sufficiently demonstrated that common questions of law and fact predominated." This indicates that the court found sufficient evidence that the workers' claims were similar enough to be addressed collectively.
The court also noted that the allegations in the complaint adequately stated causes of action for breach of contract on behalf of the class. The ruling emphasized that the defendants' argument regarding the need for individualized determinations did not defeat the commonality required for class certification. The court referenced previous cases to support its decision, stating, "Differences in job duties and project assignments do not bar class treatment where, as here, plaintiffs' claims that defendants systematically failed to pay the prevailing wage are particularly appropriate for class certification."
Impact
This ruling is expected to have a significant impact on the landscaping industry in New York, particularly for companies involved in public works projects. By affirming the class certification, the court has paved the way for potentially hundreds of workers to seek compensation for unpaid wages collectively. This decision reinforces the importance of adhering to prevailing wage laws and could encourage more workers to come forward with similar claims.
The ruling also sets a precedent for future class actions in the labor sector, particularly in industries where workers may face similar wage disputes. It highlights the court's willingness to support collective action in cases where employees share common grievances against their employers. This could lead to increased scrutiny of wage practices within the landscaping and construction industries, prompting companies to ensure compliance with wage laws to avoid similar legal challenges.
What's Next
The defendants in this case may seek to appeal the ruling, although details regarding any potential appeal were not specified in the court filing. Additionally, there may be related cases pending that could further address wage issues within the landscaping sector.