IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING. No SEA

Transcription

1 The Honorable William Downing IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING 0 GUULED ALI, an individual, AHMED- AMIN DAHIR, an individual, ROBERT W. HOUSER, an individual, ISMAIL MOHAMED, an individual, IBRAHIMA THIAM, an individual, LELA WAETIN, an individual, and MICHAEL D. WINSTON, an individual, vs. Plaintiffs, ATZ, INC., a Washington corporation d/b/a DOUG FOX PARKING, and SHUTTLE PARK TWO, INC., a Washington corporation, Defendants. No SEA DEFENDANTS ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT 0 In answer to the Class Action Complaint ( Complaint ) filed by Plaintiffs Guuled Ali, Ahmed-Amin Dahir, Robert W. Houser, Ismail Mohamed, Ibrahima Thiam, Lela Waetin, and Michael D. Winston, Defendant ATZ, Inc. ( ATZ ) d/b/a Doug Fox Parking ( Defendant ) admits, denies, and alleges as follows: NATURE OF THE ACTION. Paragraph of the Complaint requires no response from Defendant because it contains a statement of Plaintiffs legal position and claims rather than an assertion of fact. To DEF S ANSWER TO PLTFS CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT - FIRMWIDE: Case No SEA 00 University Street, Suite 00 Seattle, WA

2 0 0 the extent Paragraph is intended to assert any factual allegations, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the PARTIES. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant admits that Plaintiff Ali is a natural person. Defendant admits that Plaintiff Ali worked for ATZ during a period between January, 0 through November 0, 0. Defendant avers that Plaintiff Ali s pay records speak for themselves. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation regarding the location of Plaintiff Ali s residence and on that basis denies the allegation. Except as specifically admitted, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant admits that Plaintiff Dahir is a natural person. Defendant admits that Plaintiff Dahir worked for ATZ during a period between January, 0 through November 0, 0. Defendant avers that Plaintiff Dahir s pay records speak for themselves. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation regarding the location of Plaintiff Dahir s residence and on that basis denies the allegation. Except as specifically admitted, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant admits that Plaintiff Houser is a natural person. Defendant admits that Plaintiff Houser worked for ATZ from on or about January, 0 through November 0, 0. Defendant avers that Plaintiff Houser s pay records speak for themselves. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation regarding the location of Plaintiff Houser s residence and DEF S ANSWER TO PLTFS CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT - FIRMWIDE: Case No SEA 00 University Street, Suite 00 Seattle, WA

3 0 0 on that basis denies the allegation. Except as specifically admitted, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant admits that Plaintiff Mohamed is a natural person. Defendant admits that Plaintiff Mohamed worked for Defendant from on or about February, 0 through November, 0. Defendant avers that Plaintiff Mohamed s pay records speak for themselves. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation regarding the location of Plaintiff Mohamed s residence and on that basis denies the allegation. Except as specifically admitted, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant admits that Plaintiff Thiam is a natural person. Defendant admits that Plaintiff Thiam worked for ATZ from on or about January, 0 through November 0, 0. Defendant avers that Plaintiff Thiam s pay records speak for themselves. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation regarding the location of Plaintiff Thiam s residence and on that basis denies the allegation. Except as specifically admitted, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant lacks knowledge and information about Shuttle Park Two, Inc., which is a separate entity, and denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the Complaint on that basis. 0. Answering Paragraph 0 of the Complaint, Defendant admits that Plaintiff Winston is a natural person. Defendant admits that Plaintiff Winston worked for ATZ during a period between January, 0 through November 0, 0. Defendant avers that Plaintiff Winston s pay records speak for themselves. Defendant lacks sufficient knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the allegation regarding the location of Plaintiff Winston s residence and on that basis denies the allegation. Except as specifically admitted, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 0 of the DEF S ANSWER TO PLTFS CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT - FIRMWIDE: Case No SEA 00 University Street, Suite 00 Seattle, WA

4 0 0. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant admits that ATZ, Inc. ( ATZ ) is a business incorporated in the state of Washington with headquarters at South 0th Street, SeaTac, WA. Defendant further admits that ATZ provides parking lot management and services at the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport and operates both within and outside the City of SeaTac. Defendant lacks knowledge and information of the meaning of otherwise, and denies the remaining allegations on that basis. Except as specifically admitted, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant avers that any online materials published by ATZ speak for themselves. Defendant lacks knowledge and information of the meaning of online publicity, and denies the remaining allegations on that basis. Except as specifically admitted, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant admits that ATZ employed Plaintiffs Ali, Dahir, Houser, Mohamed, and Winston for a period of time. Except as specifically admitted, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant lacks knowledge and information about Shuttle Park Two, Inc. ( Shuttle Park Two ), which is a separate entity, and denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the Complaint on that basis.. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant lacks knowledge and information about Shuttle Park Two, which is a separate entity, and denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the Complaint on that basis.. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant lacks knowledge and information about Shuttle Park Two, which is a separate entity, and denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the Complaint on that basis. DEF S ANSWER TO PLTFS CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT - FIRMWIDE: Case No SEA 00 University Street, Suite 00 Seattle, WA

5 0 0 JURISDICTION AND VENUE. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant admits that it is located in and conducts business in King County, Washington. Paragraph contains legal conclusions regarding the jurisdiction of the Court that do not require a response. Except as specifically admitted, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the SUBSTANTIVE ALLEGATIONS. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Paragraph contains legal conclusions not requiring a response. To the extent Paragraph is intended to assert any factual allegations, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the 0. Answering Paragraph 0 of the Complaint, Paragraph 0 contains legal conclusions not requiring a response. To the extent Paragraph 0 is intended to assert any factual allegations, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 0 of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Paragraph contains legal conclusions not requiring a response. To the extent Paragraph is intended to assert any factual allegations, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Paragraph contains legal conclusions not requiring a response. To the extent Paragraph is intended to assert any factual allegations, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Paragraph contains legal conclusions not requiring a response. To the extent Paragraph is intended to assert any factual DEF S ANSWER TO PLTFS CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT - FIRMWIDE: Case No SEA 00 University Street, Suite 00 Seattle, WA

6 0 0 allegations, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Paragraph contains legal conclusions not requiring a response. To the extent Paragraph is intended to assert any factual allegations, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Paragraph contains legal conclusions not requiring a response. To the extent Paragraph is intended to assert any factual allegations, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Paragraph contains legal conclusions not requiring a response. To the extent Paragraph is intended to assert any factual allegations, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS AS TO PLAINTIFFS. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant admits that Plaintiff Ali worked for ATZ during a period between January, 0 and November 0, 0. Defendant avers that Plaintiff Ali s pay records speak for themselves. Except as specifically admitted, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant admits that Plaintiff Dahir worked for ATZ during a period between January, 0 and November 0, 0. Defendant avers that Plaintiff Dahir s pay records speak for themselves. Except as specifically admitted, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant admits that Plaintiff Houser worked for ATZ during a period between January, 0 and November 0, 0. Defendant DEF S ANSWER TO PLTFS CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT - FIRMWIDE: Case No SEA 00 University Street, Suite 00 Seattle, WA

7 0 0 avers that Plaintiff Houser s pay records speak for themselves. Except as specifically admitted, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the 0. Answering Paragraph 0 of the Complaint, Defendant admits that Plaintiff Mohamed worked for Defendant during a period between February, 0 and November, 0. Defendant avers that Plaintiff Mohamed s pay records speak for themselves. Except as specifically admitted, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 0 of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendants admit that Plaintiff Thiam worked for ATZ during a period between January, 0 and November 0, 0. Defendants aver that Plaintiff Thiam s pay records speak for themselves. Except as specifically admitted, Defendants deny each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant lacks knowledge and information about Shuttle Park Two, which is a separate entity, and denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the Complaint on that basis.. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant admits that Plaintiff Winston worked for ATZ during a period between January, 0 and November 0, 0. Defendant avers that Plaintiff Winston s pay records speak for themselves. Except as specifically admitted, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the CLASS ALLEGATIONS. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant denies any claim or implication by Plaintiffs that this action is appropriately maintained as a class action. Except as specifically admitted, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the DEF S ANSWER TO PLTFS CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT - FIRMWIDE: Case No SEA 00 University Street, Suite 00 Seattle, WA

8 0 0. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant denies any claim or implication by Plaintiffs that they have a right to amend their pleadings beyond what is permitted by the Court s rules and orders. Except as specifically admitted, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the 0. Answering Paragraph 0 of the Complaint, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 0 of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the CAUSES OF ACTION Count - Statutory Violations. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Paragraph contains legal conclusions not requiring a response. To the extent Paragraph is intended to assert any factual allegations, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the DEF S ANSWER TO PLTFS CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT - FIRMWIDE: Case No SEA 00 University Street, Suite 00 Seattle, WA

9 0 0. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Paragraph contains legal conclusions not requiring a response. To the extent Paragraph is intended to assert any factual allegations, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Paragraph contains legal conclusions not requiring a response. To the extent Paragraph is intended to assert any factual allegations, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Paragraph contains legal conclusions not requiring a response. To the extent Paragraph is intended to assert any factual allegations, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the Count - Unjust Enrichment 0. Answering Paragraph 0 of the Complaint, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph 0 of the Count - Injunctive and Declaratory Relief. Answering Paragraph of the Complaint, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Paragraph of the PRAYER FOR RELIEF In answer to Plaintiffs prayer for relief, including without limitation Paragraphs A through G therein, Defendant denies that Plaintiffs are entitled to any of the relief requested in their prayer for relief. DEF S ANSWER TO PLTFS CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT - FIRMWIDE: Case No SEA 00 University Street, Suite 00 Seattle, WA

10 0 0 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL In answer to Plaintiffs demand for jury trial, Plaintiffs demand for jury trial contains legal conclusions not requiring a response. Except as specifically admitted, Defendant denies each and every allegation contained in Plaintiffs demand for jury trial. DEFENSES AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES. The Complaint and each of its purported causes of action fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.. Defendant is not an employer subject to the minimum wage provisions of Chapter., et seq., of the City of SeaTac Municipal code.. Defendant is not a transportation employer within the meaning of Chapter., et seq., of the City of SeaTac Municipal code because it does not employ, or has not employed, or more nonmanagerial, nonsupervisory employees in the performance of applicable services under the ordinance and/or because they do not operate a fleet of more than ten shuttle vans or buses.. Some or all of the work, if any, performed by Plaintiffs and the putative class occurred outside of the City of SeaTac and is not subject to the minimum wage provisions of Chapter., et seq., of the City of SeaTac Municipal code.. The Complaint and each of its purported causes of action are preempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act, U.S.C. 0, et seq., and/or the Airline Deregulation Act, U.S.C... SeaTac Municipal Code section..00 does not apply to operations at the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport because, under the Revised Airports Act, the airport is under the exclusive jurisdiction and control of the Port of Seattle. See RCW.0.0. Therefore, the Complaint and each of its purported causes of action are barred.. The claims of Plaintiffs and the putative class for violations of RCW..00 (willful withholding of wages), and for exemplary (double) damages under RCW..00, are DEF S ANSWER TO PLTFS CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT - 0 FIRMWIDE: Case No SEA 00 University Street, Suite 00 Seattle, WA

11 0 0 barred because, at a minimum, a bona fide dispute exists as to the obligation to pay the wages sought in this action and/or because Defendant did not reach an organizational consensus as to the issue(s) in dispute and/or because any incorrect deductions from wages were made erroneously rather than intentionally and/or because Plaintiffs knowingly submitted to any alleged violations.. The claims of Plaintiffs and the putative class are barred because Defendant acted reasonably, lawfully, and in good faith, and not willfully or with any intent to deprive Plaintiffs of any part of their wages or to pay Plaintiffs a lower wage than that to which they were entitled while working for Defendant.. Plaintiffs claims and the claims of the putative class are barred in whole or in part as to all hours which do not constitute hours worked or compensable time under Washington law so that the minimum wage need not be paid for those hours. 0. Plaintiffs claims and the claims of the putative class are barred in whole or in part by the doctrine of de minimis non curat lex.. Plaintiffs and the putative class have been paid all wages and all other compensation due to them by virtue of their employment, if any, with Defendant.. Defendant is entitled to an offset against any damages awarded for amounts paid to Plaintiffs and the putative class to which they were not otherwise entitled, including but not limited to wage overpayments.. This action is not properly maintainable as a class action because Plaintiffs cannot establish all the elements necessary for class certification in that, among other things: common issues of fact or law do not predominate, to the contrary, individual issues predominate; Plaintiffs claims are not representative or typical of the claims of the putative class; Plaintiffs are not proper class representatives; Plaintiffs and alleged putative class counsel are not adequate representatives for the putative class; the putative class is not so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable; there does not exist a well-defined community of interest as to the DEF S ANSWER TO PLTFS CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT - FIRMWIDE: Case No SEA 00 University Street, Suite 00 Seattle, WA

12 0 0 questions of law and fact involved; and the putative class is sufficiently manageable without implementing the class action mechanism and, therefore, it is not the superior method for adjudicating this dispute.. Plaintiffs lack standing to assert claims on behalf of any other person or class, including but not limited to claims for exemplary (double) damages under RCW..00 and claims for injunctive relief.. Plaintiffs claims and the claims of the putative class are barred in whole or in part by the doctrines of laches, waiver, estoppel, unclean hands, avoidable consequences, ratification, and/or failure to mitigate.. Plaintiffs and the putative class are not entitled to equitable relief in that they have an adequate remedy at law and have not pled and cannot prove irreparable injury.. Defendant s defenses above are likewise asserted as defenses to the claims of any and all members of any class that may be certified in this case.. Defendant has not yet completed a thorough investigation and study or completed discovery of all facts and circumstances of the subject matter of the Complaint, and accordingly, reserves the right to amend, modify, revise or supplement its Answer, and to plead such further defenses and/or affirmative defenses and take such further actions as it may deem proper and necessary in its defense upon the completion of its investigation and study. RELIEF REQUESTED BY DEFENDANT WHEREFORE, having fully answered Plaintiffs Complaint, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court:. Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint in its entirety;. Deny each and every demand, claim and prayer for relief contained in Plaintiffs Complaint; DEF S ANSWER TO PLTFS CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT - FIRMWIDE: Case No SEA 00 University Street, Suite 00 Seattle, WA

13 . Award to Defendant its reasonable attorneys fees, costs, and expenses incurred in defending this action pursuant to applicable law, including all attorneys fees, costs and expenses recoverable under RCW.. and Rule ; and. Grant such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper. 0 0 Dated: June, 0 s/ Douglas E. Smith Douglas E. Smith, WSBA # desmith@littler.com Breanne Sheetz Martell, WSBA # bsmartell@littler.com Jeannie Lee Bohlman, WSBA # jbohlman@littler.com 00 University Street, Suite 00 Seattle, WA 0. Phone: Fax: 0.. Attorneys for Defendants ATZ, INC., a Washington corporation d/b/a DOUG FOX PARKING DEF S ANSWER TO PLTFS CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT - FIRMWIDE: Case No SEA 00 University Street, Suite 00 Seattle, WA

14 0 0 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I am a resident of the State of Washington, over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to the within action. My business address is, 00 University Street, Ste. 00, Seattle, WA 0. I hereby certify that on June, 0: I ELECTRONICALLY FILED the foregoing document(s) with the Clerk of the Court via the King County Superior Court E-Filing System, and I served a copy on the following person(s) who have opted in for e-service: Duncan C. Turner, WSBA No. 0 duncanturner@badgleymullins.com BADGLEY MULLINS TURNER PLLC Ballinger Way NE, Suite 00 Seattle, WA Telephone: (0) - Facsimile: (0) - I further certify that on June, 0, I served a copy of the foregoing document(s) by: to the address(es) of the person(s) set forth below. Daniel R. Whitmore, WSBA No. 0 dan@whitmorelawfirm.com LAW OFFICE OF DANIEL R. WHITMORE th Ave. W, #00 Seattle, WA Telephone: (0) -00 Facsimile : (0) -0 I declare under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the above is true and correct. Executed on June, 0, at Seattle, Washington. s/ Sally Swearinger Sally Swearinger sswearinger@littler.com DEF S ANSWER TO PLTFS CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT - FIRMWIDE: Case No SEA 00 University Street, Suite 00 Seattle, WA

15 CONFIRMATION RECEIPT Case Number: Case Title: Submitted By: Bar Number: User ID: Submitted Date/Time: Received Date/Time: Total Cost: --0- SEA ALI ET AL VS ATZ INC DBA ET ANO Douglas Smith dgesmith //0 ::0 PM //0 ::0 PM $0.00 DOCUMENTS Document Type: File Name: Cost: ANSWER OF DEFENDANT ATZ, INC. RE PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT ATZ Ali Defs' Answer to pdf $0.00 Printed On: //0 :: PM Page of

16 ALI ET AL SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KING vs. ATZ INC DBA ET ANO Case No.: --0- SEA CERTIFICATE OF E-SERVICE (AFSR) I, Douglas Smith, certify that I initiated electronic service of the following document(s) on the parties listed below who have consented to accept electronic service via the King County efiling Application. Service was initiated on June, 0 at :: PM. Document(s):. ANSWER OF DEFENDANT ATZ, INC. RE PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT Parties:. Breanne Sheetz Martell, Attorney for Respondent/Defendant bsmartell@littler.com. Jeannie Bohlman, Attorney for Respondent/Defendant jbohlman@littler.com. Douglas Smith, Attorney for Respondent/Defendant desmith@littler.com. Duncan Turner, Attorney for Petitioner/Plaintiff dturner@badgleymullins.com Executed this th day of June, 0. s/ Douglas Smith WSBA #: 00 University Street #00 Seattle, WA desmith@littler.com CERTIFICATE OF E-SERVICE -