Case 3:10-cv HEH Document 1 Filed 08/19/10 Page 1 of 7

Similar documents
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION AMENDED COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION. Case No. COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION. -v- Civil No. 3:12-cv-4176

Case 5:15-cv RWS Document 1 Filed 07/14/15 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1

Case: 1:16-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 11/23/16 Page 1 of 13 PageID #:1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Case 3:10-cv P-BN Document 76 Filed 07/27/11 Page 1 of 11 PageID 995

similarly situated, seeks the recovery of unpaid wages and related damages for unpaid minimum wage and overtime hours worked, while employed by Bab.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

Case 3:12-cv M Document 6 Filed 11/07/12 Page 1 of 7 PageID 18

Case 8:10-cv RWT Document 77 Filed 03/09/12 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE DIVISION. v. CASE NO. 15-CV-1588

Case: 1:17-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 10/27/17 Page 1 of 14 PageID #:1 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Case: 2:16-cv ALM-KAJ Doc #: 1 Filed: 06/22/16 Page: 1 of 22 PAGEID #: 1

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the putative class.

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 02/01/17 Page 1 of 23. Plaintiff,

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 08/31/17 Page 1 of 14

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 02/20/17 Page 1 of 13

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 04/25/17 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1. Plaintiffs, COMPLAINT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI WESTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case: 1:17-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 01/03/17 Page 1 of 15 PageID #:1 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MONTANA BILLINGS DIVISION

Case 1:16-cv MJW Document 1 Filed 02/09/16 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Case 2:16-cv Document 1 Filed 02/10/16 Page 1 of 13 U.S. DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON NO.

Case 6:17-cv Document 1 Filed 11/17/17 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

Case 1:16-cv Document 1 Filed 01/28/16 Page 1 of 29 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 12/07/17 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK. Defendants.

Case: 1:17-cv MRB Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/14/17 Page: 1 of 24 PAGEID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 2:17-cv SGC Document 1 Filed 12/29/17 Page 1 of 14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE COLUMBIA DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) COLLECTIVE ACTION COMPLAINT INTRODUCTION

P H I L L I P S DAYES

Case: 3:14-cv Doc #: 1 Filed: 12/31/14 1 of 18. PageID #: 1

KUO, M.J. STATEME1IT. (hereinafter referred to as "Defendants"), to recover damages for egregious violations. Telephone: U.

Case 7:18-cv CS Document 15 Filed 05/31/18 Page 1 of 23

Case: 1:17-cv Document #: 11 Filed: 04/18/17 Page 1 of 26 PageID #:51

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION. v. No. 1:18-cv- COMPLAINT COLLECTIVE ACTION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN GREEN BAY DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 08/30/17 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 1. No.: Defendants.

Case 1:17-cv AJN Document 17 Filed 03/24/17 Page 1 of 24 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 07/05/18 Page 1 of 18

CASE 0:16-cv Document 1 Filed 06/21/16 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Case 9:17-cv RLR Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/04/2017 Page 1 of 18 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE

Case 5:18-cv EJD Document 31 Filed 05/03/18 Page 1 of 14

6:15-cv MGL Date Filed 10/13/15 Entry Number 26 Page 1 of 13

Case 1:19-cv BPG Document 1 Filed 01/02/19 Page 1 of 15 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MARLYAND

Plaintiff, Defendant.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION Case No. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION. Hon.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION CASE NO.:

Case 2:14-cv JFW-AGR Document 1 Filed 06/10/14 Page 1 of 18 Page ID #:1

JURISDICTION AND VENUE. 2. This Court has original federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1331

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 07/26/18 Page 1 of 43 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

underpaid overtime compensation, and such other relief available by law. Plaintiffs, against INC.; ARLETE TURTURRO, jointly and severally,

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 12/15/17 Page 1 of 22

Case 1:16-cv Document 1 Filed 11/27/16 Page 1 of 15

Case 2:11-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 09/09/11 Page 1 of 11

2:14-cv DCN Date Filed 10/23/14 Entry Number 1 Page 1 of 10

2.1T FILED. 3; b ov 16go-J-.9s- CLERK, U. S. DISTRICT COURT

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 02/01/18 Page 1 of 15

"Defendants"), to recover damages for egregious. Plaintiffs, -against- counsel, brings this action against FIVE BROTHERS AUTO SPA AND LUBE

Case 1:17-cv JEM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/11/2017 Page 1 of 14 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE NO.

Case 1:16-cv Document 1 Filed 11/18/16 Page 1 of 22

Case 1:19-cv Document 1 Filed 01/15/19 Page 1 of 23 ECF CASE NATURE OF THE ACTION

Plaintiff, COLLECTIVE ACTION v. PURSUANT TO 29 U.S.C. 216(b)

Case 8:17-cv VMC-MAP Document 1 Filed 03/15/17 Page 1 of 17 PageID 1 MUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

Case 2:17-cv KJM-EFB Document 1 Filed 02/17/17 Page 1 of 29

Case 4:17-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 03/15/17 Page 1 of 7

Case: 1:14-cv Document #: 1 Filed: 07/18/14 Page 1 of 23 PageID #:1

Case 4:10-cv Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 02/18/10 Page 1 of 9

Case 1:09-cv CAP Document 1 Filed 12/21/2009 Page 1 of 14

Case: 1:17-cv DCN Doc #: 14 Filed: 03/02/17 1 of 19. PageID #: 69

2:17-cv DCN Date Filed 09/10/17 Entry Number 1 Page 1 of 9

4:18-cv RBH Date Filed 05/24/18 Entry Number 1 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA FLORENCE DIVISION

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 09/28/18 Page 1 of 25

& Associates, P.C., upon their knowledge and belief, and as against Senator Construction

7:14-cv TMC Date Filed 10/21/14 Entry Number 1 Page 1 of 13

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN. Defendant. / INTRODUCTION

Case 4:15-cv Document 1 Filed 08/24/15 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 2:12-cv AB Document 1 Filed 09/12/12 Page 1 of 9

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

(212) (212) (fax) Attorneysfor Named Plaintiffand the proposed FLSA Collective Plaintiffs

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 04/10/18 Page 1 of 10

thejasminebrand.com SO SO DEF PRODUCTIONS, INC., thejasminebrand.com

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 1:18-cv Document 1 Filed 08/01/18 Page 1 of 21

Case 7:17-cv MFU Document 1 Filed 02/17/17 Page 1 of 9 Pageid#: 1

Attorneys for Plaintiff STEVE THOMA UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA STEVE THOMA

Case 2:15-cv Document 1 Filed 08/14/15 Page 1 of 8 PageID 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE WESTERN DIVISION

Case 1:17-cv Document 1 Filed 12/08/17 Page 1 of 21

1. OVERTIME COMPENSATION AND

Case 1:18-cv MSK-KMT Document 1 Filed 09/18/18 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 29 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF COLORADO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

Transcription:

Case 3:10-cv-00585-HEH Document 1 Filed 08/19/10 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGIlIMoI... ~--,::--;;;(g~-=~~ Richmond Division _:Ig- VERNON E. GILLUM, JR.; AND RUSSELL C. GURGANUS, GERALDINE TAYLOR; individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. Plaintiffs, THE KROGER CO. Defendant, CLERK. U.S. DISTRICT COURT RICHMOND. VA CIVIL ACTION NO.: 3 I JURY TRIAL DEMANDED, V 585 I oc COMPLAINT Plaintiffs, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, seek to recover for Defendants' violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938,29 U.S.C. 201 el seq. (FLSA, and hereby state and allege as follows: 1. Plaintiffs Vernon E. Gillum, Jr., Russell C. Gurganus and Geraldine Taylor (hereinafter "Plaintiffs" bring this action for unpaid wages, unpaid overtime wages, liquidated damages, costs, attorneys' fees and expenses, declaratory and/or injunctive relief, and/or any such other relief the Court may deem appropriate under the FLSA, against The Kroger Co. and each of its respective divisions, subsidiaries and affiliates, however constituted, including but not limited to any employer of the Plaintiffs and others similarly situated, all doing a portion of their business in Virginia. All such divisions, subsidiaries and affiliates are referred to herein collectively as "Kroger" or "Defendant" as more fully alleged in paragraph 7. 2. This action is brought pursuant to the FLSA and specifically the collective action provision of the FLSA found at 216(b, for equitable and injunctive relief and to remedy

Case 3:10-cv-00585-HEH Document 1 Filed 08/19/10 Page 2 of 7 violations of the wage provisions of the FLSA by Defendant which has deprived the named Plaintiffs as well as others similarly situated to the named Plaintiffs of their lawful wages. 3. The material time for the claims under the FLSA in this case is the three-year period prior to the date of Plaintiffs' complaint and the period of additional time, if any, that Plaintiffs' and other similarly situated employees' claims were tolled or extended by agreement of Defendant, by equity, or by operation of law. 4. Defendant provides general grocery products and perishables throughout the Commonwealth of Virginia. 5. Defendant denied overtime premium pay to Plaintiffs by requiring Plaintiffs to work hours in excess of 40 without payment of overtime wages. Defendant's deliberate failure to pay Plaintiffs for all hours worked and Defendant's deliberate failure to pay Plaintiffs overtime compensation violates federal law as set out in the FLSA. See 29 CFR 541.600. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 6. The FLSA authorizes court actions by private parties to recover damages for violation of the FLSA's wage and hour provisions. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiffs' FLSA claims based upon 29 U.S.C. 216(b and 28 U.S.C. 1331-37. 7. Venue in this district is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391 (b and (c because Defendant operates in this district and a substantial part of the unlawful conduct giving rise to the claims occurred in this district. PARTIES 8. Defendant maintains its principal place of business in Cincinnati, Ohio and does business within the Commonwealth of Virginia. 9. Plaintiffs are residents of and are domiciled in the Commonwealth of Virginia. 2

Case 3:10-cv-00585-HEH Document 1 Filed 08/19/10 Page 3 of 7 GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 10. Plaintiff Vernon E. Gillum, Jr. ("Gillum" worked for the Defendant as a Grocery Manager from February 2, 2009 to September 5, 2009 at Defendant's store #502 located at 4816 South Laburnum Avenue in Richmond, Virginia. 11. Plaintiff Russell C. Gurganus ("Gurganus" worked for the Defendant as a Meat Manager from on or around November 2004 until January 2010. Gurganus worked at Defendant's store located on Chamberlayne Avenue in Richmond, Virginia and at Defendant's store # 502 located at 4816 South Laburnum Avenue in Richmond, Virginia. 12. From on or around 2001 until 2007 Plaintiff Geraldine Taylor ("Taylor" worked for Defendant as a Customer Service Manager. From 2007 to March 17,2010 Taylor worked for Defendant as an Assistant Store Manager. At all times Taylor worked at Defendant's store #502 located at 4816 South Laburnum Avenue in Richmond, Virginia. 13. Plaintiffs were required to regularly work hours in excess of 40 (forty per week and were not paid overtime based upon one and one half times their regular rates of pay. Further, Plaintiffs were not compensated for other work required by Defendant. 14. Though Plaintiffs had titles of Grocery Manager, Meat Manager and Customer Service Manager, they did not work in the capacity of managers for more than fifty percent (50% of their workweek and did not have authority to hire or fire employees. Their primary duty was not "management." Plaintiffs performed non-managerial tasks for eighty (80 percent of their work time while employed at Kroger. Management and managerial discretion were not an integral part of their job duties. 3

Case 3:10-cv-00585-HEH Document 1 Filed 08/19/10 Page 4 of 7 15. Plaintiffs did not meet the exemption outlined in 213(a( 1 of the FLSA because they did not work in a bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity while employed by Defendant. 16. In addition to depriving Plaintiffs of overtime wages, Defendant's failure to accurately account for and report all compensable time worked by the Plaintiffs deprived Plaintiffs of what would otherwise be overtime pay in excess of the hours reported or maintained by Defendant. COUNT I - Violations ofthe Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (Brought Against the Defendant by the Individually-Named Plaintiffs 17. Plaintiffs re-adopt, re-allege and incorporate by reference paragraphs 1 through 16 set forth above as if fully restated herein. 18. There are numerous other similarly situated employees and former employees of Defendant who have been improperly compensated in violation of the FLSA and who would benefit from the issuance of Court-Supervised Notice of the present lawsuit and the opportunity to join the present lawsuit. Those similarly situated employees are known to Defendant and are readily identifiable and locatable through Defendant's records. Specifically, all current and former Grocery Manager, Meat Manager and Customer Service Manager employees of Defendant who have been employed by the Defendant who have worked as Grocery Managers, Meat Managers, and Customer Service Managers and have not been compensated for the same would benefit from Court-Supervised Notice and the opportunity to join the present lawsuit and should be so notified. 19. At all material times herein, Plaintiffs and others similarly situated have been entitled to the rights, protections, and benefits provided under the FLSA. 4

Case 3:10-cv-00585-HEH Document 1 Filed 08/19/10 Page 5 of 7 20. Defendant violated the FLSA by failing to pay overtime compensation to the named Plaintiffs as well as others similarly situated. 21. The FLSA regulates, among other things, the payment of overtime pay by employers whose employees are engaged in commerce, or engaged in the production of goods for commerce, or employed in an enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce. 29 U.S.C. 207(a(1. 22. Defendant was, and is, subject to the overtime pay requirements of the FLSA because it is an enterprise engaged in commerce and its employees are engaged in commerce. 23. Section 13 of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. 213, exempts certain categories of employees from overtime pay obligations. None of the FLSA exemptions apply to the Plaintiffs. Accordingly, Plaintiffs must be paid overtime pay in accordance with the FLSA. 24. Defendant's failure to accurately pay overtime was, and is, willfully perpetrated. Defendant has not acted in good faith nor with reasonable grounds to believe its actions and omissions were not a violation of the FLSA, and, as a result thereof, Plaintiffs are entitled to recover an award of liquidated damages in an amount equal to the amount of unpaid overtime premium pay described above pursuant to Section 16(b of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. 216(b. 25. Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of prejudgment interest at the applicable legal rate as well as reimbursement of their costs, attorneys' fees and expenses incurred. 26. As a result of these willful violations of the FLSA's overtime provisions; overtime compensation has been unlawfully withheld by Defendant from Plaintiffs for which Defendant is liable pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 216(b. 5

Case 3:10-cv-00585-HEH Document 1 Filed 08/19/10 Page 6 of 7 WHEREFORE, the Plaintiffs, Vernon E. Gillum, Jr., Russell C. Gurganus and Geraldine Taylor, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, respectfully pray: a. That at the earliest possible time, they be allowed to give notice, or that the Court issue such Notice, to all Defendant's employees in all locations within the United States during the three years immediately preceding the filing of their suit and to all other potential Plaintiffs who may be similarly situated informing them that this action has been filed, of the nature of the action, and of their right to opt-into this lawsuit if they worked overtime but were not paid proper compensation and benefits pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 216(b; b. That the Plaintiffs be awarded damages in the amount of their respective unpaid overtime compensation and benefits, plus an equal amount of liquidated damages pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 216(b, and prejudgment interest; c. That Plaintiffs be awarded their reasonable attorney's fees, including the costs and expenses of this action; and d. That the Plaintiffs be awarded such other legal and equitable relief including, but not limited to, any injunctive and/or declaratory relief to which they may be entitled. 6

Case 3:10-cv-00585-HEH Document 1 Filed 08/19/10 Page 7 of 7 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiff hereby requests trial by jury of all issues triable by jury under Virginia and Federal law. Dated: August [f, 20 I 0 Respectfully submitted, 1. ~~ EN SCHREIBER J A L. SUYES (V Marks & Harrison, P. C. 1500 Forest Ave Richmond, V A 23229 (804 282-0999 Telephone (804 288-1330 Facsimile aschreiber@marksandharrison.com jsuyes@marksandharrison.com 7