Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, No. 11-864, 2013 WL 1222646 (Mar. 27, 2013)
In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court of the United States overturned the lower courts’ rulings to grant class certification for the plaintiffs’ antitrust claims. Although this case dealt with antitrust violations, Defense Attorneys will ...
Continue Reading →Stamped Complaint 13-1727 (FB)(RML)
On April 1, 2013, Fitapelli & Schaffer filed a class and collective action lawsuit against Wanrong Trading Corp. (“Wanrong”) for failing to pay overtime wages for hours worked over 40 per workweek. According to the lawsuit, Wanrong misclassified its employees as exempt from overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) and the New York Labor Law (“NYLL”). In order to minimize labor costs, Wanrong, a meat processing ...
Continue Reading →
Teed v. Thomas & Betts Power Solutions, LLC, Nos. 12-2440, 12-3029, 2013 WL 1197861 (7th Cir. March 26, 2013)
A federal appellate court agreed with the lower court to apply the doctrine of successor liability to cases dealing with violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”). ...
Continue Reading →On March 13, 2013, the New York City Council passed new legislation (814-A), that will prohibit employers from basing employment decisions on a job applicant’s unemployed status and prohibit employers from posting in job advertisements that current employment is a job requirement or that unemployed applicants should not apply. The law is set to take effect on June 11, 2013.
Under the new legislation, an employer, with at least four employees, cannot base a hiring decision of a job applicant on ...
Continue Reading →Martinez v. Hilton Hotels Corp., No. 10 Civ. 7688(JLC), 2013 WL 1087211 (S.D.N.Y. March 15, 2013).
The Court denied the defendants’ (the employers) motions for summary judgment. The defendants tried to get the case dismissed by arguing that the plaintiffs (the employees) qualified for the executive exemption making them not entitled to overtime. The defendants also tried to have the court calculate overtime damages using the fluctuating work week method.
The plaintiffs were housekeeping managers and assistant housekeeping managers who worked at ...
Continue Reading →A federal judge approved a settlement awarding $20.9 million to be paid to Rite Aid assistant managers and co-store managers for their overtime claims. The Rite Aid assistant managers and co-store managers were paid a set salary regardless of how many hours they worked. The lawsuit claimed that Rite Aid assistant managers and co-store managers were misclassified as exempt employees to avoid being paid overtime, therefore, they argued they should have been paid hourly and time and one half their ...
Continue Reading →Elite Modeling, a top modeling agency, is being sued by a former intern for allegedly failing to pay its interns overtime pay for the hours they worked in excess of 40. The intern claims that the company misclassified its interns as exempt from wage requirements and then made them work more than 40 hours a week, including weekends.
The intern claims that her duties included “Assisting Bookers with scouting new talent at open calls; Assisting with product management and development including ...
Continue Reading →Fitapelli & Schaffer filed an amended complaint against Chipotle seeking overtime compensation on behalf of Apprentice’s nation-wide. We allege that the primary duties of an Apprentice are similar to hourly workers. To date, employees from the following states have joined the lawsuit: New York, Texas, Florida, Georgia, Kansas and Missouri.
Click Here to Read the Amended Complaint
Continue Reading →A lawsuit filed against A-1 First Class Moving & Storage (“A-1 Moving”) alleges that A-1 Moving failed to pay its service employees the prevailing wage rate as set by the New York City Comptroller’s Office. The prevailing wage is the pay rate set by law for work on public works projects. The prevailing wage law covers anyone who: works in construction under a public works contract on a City-owned facility; provides building services such as security, cleaning, temporary office clerical, ...
Continue Reading →Counsel for Defendants asked the Court to compel removal of Plaintiffs’ website (www.TGIFridayslawsuit.com) alleging the website contained false and misleading information and infringed on T.G.I. Friday’s trademark. Plaintiffs argued that the website was proper attorney advertising and would not infringe on Friday’s trademarks because the public would not be confused regarding who controlled the website. The website contains disclaimers specifically stating that, “This website is not affiliated or endorsed by TGI Fridays or tgifridays.com. This website provides information regarding a ...
Continue Reading →