A violation is willful if the employer ‘either knew or showed reckless disregard for…whether its conduct was prohibited by the statute.’ Plaintiff claims Defendant acted willfully and intentionally because Defendant knew of the FLSA’s minimum wage and overtime requirements, yet ‘recklessly failed to investigate’ whether its payroll practices were in accordance with the FLSA. The
Jon Harsley
Allegations that an employee worked an average of 70 hours per week over a nearly fourteen-month period are sufficient to state a claim for unpaid overtime wages under the FLSA.
“Defendant also argues the Complaint should be dismissed because it does not identify a week during which Plaintiff worked more than forty hours and was not properly compensated for overtime. The Court finds that Plaintiff has adequately pleaded his overtime claim. He alleged that he worked on average seventy hours per week from December 3,…
A severance agreement that does not mention of overtime claims, hours, or wage amounts, does not compute alleged overtime hours worked to which the release applies, and does not refer to any dispute about overtime wages is not an enforceable release of FLSA rights.
“When evaluating whether settlements purporting to waive or release claims pursuant to the FLSA may be enforced, courts look to evidence in the records before them to see whether the settlements resolved ‘bona fide disputes’ regarding the number of allegedly unpaid hours or compensation due at the time that payment was received. By contrast, here,…
Allegations that an employer’s billing practices violated a federal criminal statute prohibiting healthcare fraud are sufficient to state a claim under Sabine Pilot.
“In this case, the plaintiff’s averments regarding the defendant’s billing practices are criminal in nature. For example, the plaintiff’s original complaint alleges that ‘BCH began requesting that the Plaintiff see multiple patients at the same time, bill units in empty time slots, and bill incorrectly. However, Plaintiff refused….’ Such practice could subject individuals to criminal…
An employee who can perform the essential functions of her job with the use of a cane is a qualified individual under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
“A ‘qualified individual’ means ‘an individual who, with or without reasonable accommodations, can perform the essential functions of the employment position that such individual holds or desires.’ In Plaintiff’s Third Amended and Restated Complaint, Plaintiff adds the allegation that she ‘required the cane to perform the tasks within the course and scope of employment at…
An employee is disabled under the Americans with Disabilities Act if she requires a cane to perform her job.
“In Plaintiff’s Third Amended and Restated Complaint, Plaintiff adds the allegation that she ‘required the cane to perform the tasks within the course and scope of employment at Defendant’s facility.’ Thus, unlike the complaint in Mora, Plaintiff is specifically alleging that she suffered from an impairment to a major life activity by requiring a cane…
A jury trial waiver is unenforceable if an employee has disproportionate bargaining power compared to his employer, has no opportunity to negotiate the provision, is not represented by counsel, and has no business experience, even though the waiver is bolded, in all-caps, underlined, and appears just above where the employee signed.
“As a pharmacy technician for a large corporate entity, plaintiff had virtual no ability to exert influence over her employer. For instance, all the terms of her employment were laid out unilaterally in an employee handbook published by her employer. For similar reasons, the court also finds plaintiff had no opportunity to negotiate the terms…
Evidence that a plaintiff worked offsite and from home via telecommunication to the employer’s corporate office which has more than 50 employees raises a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether she is an eligible employee under the Family and Medical Leave Act.
“The plaintiff attested that, as a Technical Support Specialist, she worked offsite and from home through telecommunication and reported to the Tampa, Florida corporate office, which has more than 50 employees . . . . Here, the plaintiff provides sufficient evidence to support her claim that she is an eligible employee under the FMLA. Because…
A hostile work environment claim is within the scope of an EEOC charge that alleges supervisors repeatedly and continuously made comments regarding an employee’s age, even though the Complaint adds additional facts and supervisors not included the EEOC charge.
“A claim is considered exhausted if is within the scope of the EEOC complaint and reasonably expected to grow out of a charge of discrimination. In examining a Title VII or ADEA action, the Court’s inquiry is not…limited to the exact charge [of discrimination]. The Fifth Circuit has recognized that a Title VII plaintiff is…
An employer’s failure to comply with the plain language of its own policy is enough to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to the true reason for firing an employee.
“In light of Pate’s wrongful interpretation and application of its Policy, and its failure to discharge a younger driver with four violations in a two-year period, a reasonable jury could disagree that Defendant’s stated reason for Plaintiff’s discharge was the true or real reason for terminating him, and find that the stated reason was pretext…