CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. 15
Regular Panel Decision

Dyson v. Stuart Petroleum Testers, Inc.

Plaintiff Rory Dyson initiated a collective action against Stuart Petroleum Testers, Inc. and Scott Yariger, alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Dyson, a 'flow tester,' claimed that he and other similarly situated workers were misclassified as independent contractors and consequently denied overtime pay for hours exceeding forty per week. The plaintiff filed a motion seeking conditional certification of the lawsuit as a collective action under the FLSA. Applying the lenient Lusardi two-stage approach, the Court found sufficient evidence indicating the existence of similarly situated individuals and a widespread discriminatory practice by the defendants. Consequently, the Court granted the plaintiff's motion for conditional certification, established the definition of the collective action, and ordered the defendants to provide contact information for potential class members.

FLSACollective ActionConditional CertificationOvertime PayIndependent Contractor MisclassificationFlow TestersOil and Gas IndustryWage and Hour DisputeOpt-in PlaintiffsLusardi Approach
References
45
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Falcon v. Starbucks Corp.

Plaintiff Falcon, a former Assistant Store Manager for Starbucks, filed a collective action under the FLSA, alleging Starbucks failed to pay overtime wages to Assistant Store Managers (ASMs). The Court initially granted conditional class certification, leading 355 ASMs to opt into the lawsuit. Defendants moved to decertify the collective action, arguing that the plaintiffs were not similarly situated, defenses were individualized, and the action would be unmanageable. The Court denied the motion, finding that the opt-in plaintiffs were similarly situated due to common job titles, descriptions, pay provisions, and a pervasive environment created by Starbucks' policies that incentivized off-the-clock work and time shaving. The Court also concluded that individualized defenses could be addressed through representative testimony and that fairness considerations favored maintaining the collective action, upholding the remedial purposes of the FLSA.

Fair Labor Standards ActFLSAOvertime WagesCollective ActionClass CertificationDecertification MotionOff-the-Clock WorkTime ShavingAssistant Store ManagersStarbucks
References
38
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Moore v. Eagle Sanitation, Inc.

Plaintiffs Kevin Moore and Roger Snyder filed a lawsuit against Eagle Sanitation Inc. and Michael Reali, seeking unpaid overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New York Labor Law. They moved for conditional certification as an FLSA collective action, production of contact information for potential class members from April 2005 to April 2011, and court authorization to circulate a Notice of Pendency. The court, presided over by Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson, granted the motion for conditional certification, finding that the plaintiffs met the lenient evidentiary standard required at this stage. Additionally, the court granted the request for defendants to produce contact information for a six-year period to account for state law claims, emphasizing judicial economy. The court also authorized the dissemination of the proposed notice, with minor modifications regarding the inclusion of defense counsel's contact details and clarification on potential costs and discovery obligations for opt-in plaintiffs.

FLSACollective ActionOvertime CompensationNew York Labor LawConditional CertificationNotice of PendencyStatute of LimitationsDiscovery of Class MembersWage and Hour DisputeEmployment Law
References
26
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Zimmer-Thomson Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board

The employer filed an action against the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and a union, seeking to set aside the union's certification as the exclusive bargaining representative and to restrain the union from taking further action before the National War Labor Board (NWLB). The employer alleged procedural flaws in the election process, including uncounted challenged ballots and denial of opportunity to be heard. Both defendants moved to dismiss the complaint. The court determined it lacked jurisdiction to review NLRB certifications, which are only informatory. Furthermore, it found that NWLB directives are merely advisory and thus cause no irreparable injury. Consequently, the court denied the employer's motion for a temporary injunction and dismissed the complaint, finding no cause of action.

Labor LawNLRB CertificationJudicial ReviewInjunctionCollective BargainingUnfair Labor PracticesWar Labor BoardChallenged BallotsDistrict Court JurisdictionAdministrative Law
References
10
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

McGlone v. Contract Callers, Inc.

Plaintiff Michael McGlone initiated a Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) action against Contract Callers, Inc. (CCI), Michael McGuire, and William Tim Wertz, alleging unpaid overtime for work performed before and after recorded workdays and during meal breaks. McGlone sought conditional certification for a nationwide collective action of Field Service Representatives (FSRs), asserting a common policy of wage violations, including uncompensated preparatory and concluding tasks, and automatic meal break deductions despite working through them. The court applied a two-step analysis for FLSA collective actions, focusing on the lenient "notice stage" standard. While the plaintiff claimed company-wide misconduct, his evidence for a nationwide class was deemed insufficient, relying primarily on "information and belief." Consequently, the court denied conditional certification for a nationwide class but granted it for FSRs employed in CCI's New York Division, where McGlone demonstrated direct personal knowledge of the alleged violations and supervisory directives. Additionally, the statute of limitations was equitably tolled as of the motion's filing date due to the court's processing time.

FLSACollective ActionConditional CertificationOvertime PayWage ViolationsMeal BreaksUncompensated WorkField Service RepresentativesEquitable TollingNew York Division
References
28
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Graff v. United Collection Bureau, Inc.

This memorandum and order addresses a class action lawsuit filed by Thomas Graff against United Collection Bureau, Inc. under the FDCPA. The parties sought final certification of a class action and approval of a cy pres settlement. The proposed settlement included payments to a public interest organization, the representative plaintiff, administration costs, and attorneys' fees. However, one class member objected to various aspects, including the scope of the release and the class's geographic scope. The court ultimately denied final approval of the settlement, citing concerns with the broad release, the unexplained expansion of the class size without commensurate benefit, and the exclusive cy pres remedy, while upholding the magistrate judge's jurisdiction. The court also modified the class to be limited solely to the New York class.

Class Action SettlementFDCPA LitigationMagistrate Judge JurisdictionCy Pres RemedyDebt Collection PracticesRule 23(e) ReviewProcedural FairnessSubstantive FairnessScope of ReleaseClass Definition
References
48
Case No. 604, 605, 674, 676, 694
Regular Panel Decision

Thompson v. Bruister & Associates

This case involves claims by over 1,700 cable technicians against DirecTV, Bruister and Associates, Inc., and Herbert C. Bruister for uncompensated off-the-clock work and other FLSA violations. The technicians allege a "culture of off-the-clock work" where they were expected to perform tasks like pre-calling customers, inventorying tools, pre-building dishes, and cleaning vehicles without pay, both before and after their recorded work hours. They also claim improper calculation of overtime rates and minimum wage violations for piece-rate workers. Defendants filed motions to decertify the collective action and to dismiss claims against DirecTV and Mr. Bruister, arguing that the technicians were not similarly situated and that individualized inquiries into damages would be too complex. The Court denied these motions, finding that common issues of liability predominated and that a collective action was appropriate given the relaxed burden of proof for damages in FLSA cases where employer records are inadequate. The Court also emphasized the importance of collective actions for plaintiffs with small individual monetary harms.

FLSAFair Labor Standards ActWage and HourOvertimeUnpaid WagesOff-the-Clock WorkCollective ActionClass ActionDecertificationPiece-rate Pay
References
29
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Life Insurance Co. of Southwest v. Brister

This is an interlocutory appeal challenging a trial court's order certifying a class action. The class, represented by M.C. Brister, Jr., comprises employees of Texas Steel Company who received workers' compensation benefits but were allegedly denied disability benefits under an Employee Benefit Plan issued by Life Insurance Company of the Southwest. The claims involved breach of contract and misrepresentation. Appellants contended that the class did not meet the requirements for certification under TEX.R.CIV.P. 42(b) and that the trial court improperly excluded evidence regarding a prior federal class action settlement. The appellate court affirmed the class certification, finding that common issues, primarily the interpretation of the Employee Benefit Plan and alleged statutory violations, predominated over individual issues, making a class action superior. While acknowledging the error in excluding evidence of the federal lawsuit, the court determined it was not a reversible error as it did not contribute to an improper judgment.

Class ActionInterlocutory AppealWorkers' CompensationDisability BenefitsBreach of ContractMisrepresentationEmployee Benefit PlanTexas Insurance CodeDeceptive Trade PracticesRule 42
References
38
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Duchene v. Michael L. Cetta, Inc.

Plaintiffs, current and former waiters at Sparks Steak House, initiated litigation under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the New York Labor Law, alleging the unlawful diversion of their tips. Following a previous order for the FLSA claim to proceed as a collective action, the plaintiffs moved for class action certification for all waiters employed by Sparks from June 14, 2000, onwards. The defendant opposed this, challenging supplemental jurisdiction and class certification requirements. However, the Court exercised supplemental jurisdiction and found that the class met all necessary criteria, including numerosity and superiority. Consequently, the Court granted the plaintiffs’ motion for class certification.

Class ActionFair Labor Standards ActNew York Labor LawTip DiversionWage and Hour ClaimsCollective ActionSupplemental JurisdictionRule 23(b)(3)Numerosity RequirementSuperiority Requirement
References
11
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Electric Alarm Trade Ass'n v. Local Union No. 3, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

This action was initiated under Section 301(a) of the National Labor Relations Act by a plaintiff seeking $450,000 in damages from a defendant union. The plaintiff alleged a breach of Article VIII, section III of their collective bargaining agreement, which stipulated the union's obligation to organize the burglar alarm industry. The defendant moved to dismiss the action or, alternatively, to stay proceedings pending arbitration. The Court denied the defendant's motion to dismiss, affirming the validity of the plaintiff's claim for relief. However, the Court granted the alternate motion, concluding that the dispute fell within the broad arbitration clause of the collective bargaining agreement and ordered the proceedings to be stayed pending arbitration.

Labor LawArbitrationCollective Bargaining AgreementBreach of ContractNational Labor Relations ActStay of ProceedingsDamages ClaimUnion ObligationsGrievance ProcedureFederal Court Decision
References
5
Showing 1-10 of 11,609 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational