Updated Daily

Case Law Database

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

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Sumrall v. T. E. Mercer Trucking Co.

Plaintiffs, former employees of the defendant's pipe yard and trucking business, sought unpaid overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The defendant argued that these employees were exempt from FLSA overtime provisions under the Motor Carrier Act, as their duties as "loaders" (specifically hookers and gin truck operators) directly affected the safety of vehicles on the highway, thereby falling under the Interstate Commerce Commission's jurisdiction. The court determined that hookers and gin truck operators did indeed perform duties that directly affected vehicle safety and were thus exempt from FLSA overtime. Consequently, the claims for overtime compensation were denied.

Fair Labor Standards ActMotor Carrier ActOvertime CompensationInterstate Commerce CommissionLoading OperationsEmployee ExemptionSafety of OperationKickersHookersGin Truck Operators

References

Case No. 11 CIV. 0377(CM)

Regular Panel Decision

Pippins v. KPMG LLP

This case concerns a decision granting Defendant KPMG LLP's motion for summary judgment, dismissing Plaintiffs' Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) claims with prejudice and their New York Labor Law (NYLL) claims without prejudice. Plaintiffs, current and former Audit Associates at KPMG, alleged that KPMG violated overtime pay requirements by classifying them as exempt. The court, presided over by District Judge McMahon, determined that Audit Associates qualify as "learned professionals" under the FLSA exemption. This conclusion was based on their specialized academic training, customary CPA-eligibility, and the requirement for them to exercise discretion and judgment in performing audit procedures, despite some routine tasks and supervision. The court rejected Plaintiffs' arguments that their work was purely rote and found their duties essential to the accounting profession, thus exempting them from FLSA overtime requirements.

FLSANew York Labor LawLearned Professional ExemptionAdministrative ExemptionAudit AssociatesKPMGOvertime PaySummary JudgmentAccounting StandardsCPA Eligibility

References

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

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Cowan v. Treetop Enterprises, Inc.

The core issue is whether unit managers at Treetop's Waffle House restaurants qualify as "bona fide executive employees" exempt from FLSA overtime pay. Plaintiffs argue their primary duty involves cooking and non-managerial tasks, not supervision, despite their job title. The court agreed, finding that managerial duties were significantly shared with district managers and that training focused on being a grill operator. Consequently, the court granted partial summary judgment for the plaintiffs regarding Treetop and William Ezell's liability for FLSA violations. However, James Shaub was dismissed as a defendant due to insufficient ownership interest, and the defendants' good faith defense was partially upheld, limiting damages to a two-year period and precluding liquidated damages.

Fair Labor Standards ActFLSAOvertime PayExecutive ExemptionPrimary DutyUnit ManagersWaffle HouseRestaurant IndustrySummary JudgmentGood Faith Defense

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Macintyre v. Moore

Pro se plaintiffs Stephen R. MacIntyre and Scott E. Sullivan sued Jack W. Moore and the Town of Henrietta, alleging Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) violations and unjust enrichment, stemming from their alleged misclassification as independent contractors. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss, challenging the unjust enrichment claim and the FLSA claim against Moore. The court granted dismissal of the unjust enrichment claim, finding an implied-in-fact contractual relationship barred it, and dismissed the FLSA claim against Moore in his official capacity as redundant. However, the court denied the motion to dismiss the FLSA claim against Moore in his individual capacity, concluding that a public official can be held individually liable as an "employer" under the FLSA based on an "economic realities" test. Consequently, the FLSA claims against Moore in his individual capacity and the Town of Henrietta will proceed.

MisclassificationIndependent ContractorFair Labor Standards ActFLSAUnjust EnrichmentMotion to DismissEmployer LiabilityPublic Official LiabilityPro Se LitigationEconomic Realities Test

References

121

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Oct 04, 2013

Boutros v. JTC Painting & Decorating Corp.

This is an Opinion & Order from the Southern District of New York concerning a lawsuit filed by two painters, Kamal Boutros and Samuel Zuniga, against their employer, JTC Painting and Decorating Corporation, and its owner John Caruso. The plaintiffs alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New York Labor Law (NYLL) for unpaid overtime, and Zuniga also claimed FLSA retaliation. Defendants moved to dismiss, arguing lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the FLSA, that Boutros’s FLSA claim was moot due to a Rule 68 offer of judgment, and for the court to decline supplemental jurisdiction over state-law claims. The Court denied the motion to dismiss, finding that the plaintiffs adequately pleaded FLSA enterprise coverage and that Boutros's FLSA claim was not moot because the Rule 68 offer did not definitively provide the maximum possible recovery, thereby preserving a live controversy. Consequently, the Court retained supplemental jurisdiction over the state-law claims. A conference was scheduled for case management.

FLSANew York Labor LawUnpaid OvertimeWage and HourRetaliationMotion to DismissRule 68 Offer of JudgmentSubject Matter JurisdictionSupplemental JurisdictionEnterprise Coverage

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Dec 29, 2010

Lindberg v. UHS OF LAKESIDE, LLC

Plaintiffs Cherie Lindberg and Grady Moody filed a motion for conditional class certification under the FLSA against Defendants UHS of Lakeside, LLC, Community Behavioral Health, LLC, and Universal Health Services, alleging unpaid overtime due to an automatic 30-minute meal break deduction policy. The policy applied to all non-exempt employees, regardless of whether they actually took a break, and placed the burden on employees to reverse the deduction via time adjustment forms, which management allegedly discouraged or ignored. The Court applied a lenient "notice stage" standard and found that Plaintiffs made a modest factual showing that they and other putative class members were victims of a common practice leading to improper compensation. The Court granted the motion for conditional class certification for all present and former hourly employees of the defendants who worked at the Memphis, Tennessee facilities from January 7, 2007, to the present. The Court also ordered defendants to provide contact information for potential opt-in plaintiffs and directed parties to submit a mutually acceptable notice letter.

FLSAOvertime PayMeal Break DeductionConditional Class CertificationCollective ActionWage and HourHealthcare EmployeesAutomatic Deduction PolicyUnpaid WorkEmployee Compensation

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Ethelberth v. Choice Security Co.

Plaintiff Onyenaemeka Ethelberth sued his former employer, Choice Security Company and its president, George Omogun, for unpaid wages and overtime under the FLSA and New York Labor Law, along with common law claims for breach of contract and unjust enrichment. Defendants cross-moved for summary judgment. The Court granted partial summary judgment to Ethelberth on his status as an employee and Omogun's individual liability under the FLSA, and for overtime compensation under the NYLL. However, the Court granted summary judgment to Defendants on individual FLSA coverage and dismissed Ethelberth's claims for unpaid wages under NYLL Article 6 and breach of contract. Claims regarding enterprise FLSA coverage, willfulness of FLSA violation, and unjust enrichment will proceed to trial.

Fair Labor Standards ActNew York Labor LawOvertime CompensationUnpaid WagesIndependent Contractor StatusEmployer LiabilitySummary JudgmentEconomic Reality TestStatute of LimitationsEnterprise Coverage

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Hoops v. KEYSPAN ENERGY

Carl Hoops (Plaintiff) sued his employers KeySpan Corporation and National Grid USA (Defendants) for alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the New York State Labor Law. Hoops claimed that defendants failed to include miscellaneous shift differentials in his regular rate of pay for overtime calculation under the FLSA and failed to compensate him for uniform laundering under New York Labor Law. The Defendants moved to dismiss both claims. The Court granted the motion to dismiss the FLSA claim without prejudice, finding it preempted by the LMRA due to the need for Collective Bargaining Agreement interpretation. The New York Labor Law claim was also dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, as it did not arise from the same common nucleus of operative fact as the FLSA claim. The Plaintiff was given twenty days to serve an amended complaint only for the FLSA claim.

Fair Labor Standards ActFLSA OvertimeShift DifferentialsNew York Labor LawUniform MaintenanceCollective Bargaining AgreementCBA InterpretationLabor Management Relations ActLMRA PreemptionSubject Matter Jurisdiction

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Terry v. Chi. Bridge & Iron Co.

This case involves plaintiffs seeking overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) from various entities operating as CB & I. Plaintiff Jeffrey W. Terry initially filed an administrative wage claim with the Texas Workforce Commission (TWC) under the Texas Labor Code and was awarded unpaid wages. Defendants subsequently moved for summary judgment, arguing that Terry's FLSA claim was barred by collateral estoppel due to the TWC's prior decision. They also moved to strike the plaintiffs' amended complaint. The court denied both motions, reasoning that the TWC lacked jurisdiction over FLSA claims, and thus collateral estoppel did not apply to Terry's FLSA claim for overtime wages or liquidated damages, as the TWC's 'bad faith' standard for penalties differed from the FLSA's liquidated damages provision. The court also found no reason to strike the amended complaint.

FLSAOvertime CompensationCollateral EstoppelRes JudicataSummary JudgmentTexas Payday LawAmended ComplaintJurisdictionUnpaid WagesLiquidated Damages

References

Showing 1-10 of 393 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

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

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

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

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Sumrall v. T. E. Mercer Trucking Co.

Fair Labor Standards ActMotor Carrier ActOvertime CompensationInterstate Commerce CommissionLoading OperationsEmployee ExemptionSafety of OperationKickersHookersGin Truck Operators

References

Case No. 11 CIV. 0377(CM)

Regular Panel Decision

Pippins v. KPMG LLP

FLSANew York Labor LawLearned Professional ExemptionAdministrative ExemptionAudit AssociatesKPMGOvertime PaySummary JudgmentAccounting StandardsCPA Eligibility

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Moore v. Eagle Sanitation, Inc.

FLSACollective ActionOvertime CompensationNew York Labor LawConditional CertificationNotice of PendencyStatute of LimitationsDiscovery of Class MembersWage and Hour DisputeEmployment Law

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Cowan v. Treetop Enterprises, Inc.

Fair Labor Standards ActFLSAOvertime PayExecutive ExemptionPrimary DutyUnit ManagersWaffle HouseRestaurant IndustrySummary JudgmentGood Faith Defense

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Macintyre v. Moore

MisclassificationIndependent ContractorFair Labor Standards ActFLSAUnjust EnrichmentMotion to DismissEmployer LiabilityPublic Official LiabilityPro Se LitigationEconomic Realities Test

References

121

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Oct 04, 2013

Boutros v. JTC Painting & Decorating Corp.

FLSANew York Labor LawUnpaid OvertimeWage and HourRetaliationMotion to DismissRule 68 Offer of JudgmentSubject Matter JurisdictionSupplemental JurisdictionEnterprise Coverage

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Dec 29, 2010

Lindberg v. UHS OF LAKESIDE, LLC

FLSAOvertime PayMeal Break DeductionConditional Class CertificationCollective ActionWage and HourHealthcare EmployeesAutomatic Deduction PolicyUnpaid WorkEmployee Compensation

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Ethelberth v. Choice Security Co.

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Hoops v. KEYSPAN ENERGY

References

Case No. MISSING

Regular Panel Decision

Terry v. Chi. Bridge & Iron Co.

FLSAOvertime CompensationCollateral EstoppelRes JudicataSummary JudgmentTexas Payday LawAmended ComplaintJurisdictionUnpaid WagesLiquidated Damages

References

Showing 1-10 of 393 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

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