ARTICLE
16 August 2013

Virginia District Court Denies Conditional Certification Of FLSA Case

B
BakerHostetler

Contributor

BakerHostetler logo
Recognized as one of the top firms for client service, BakerHostetler is a leading national law firm that helps clients around the world address their most complex and critical business and regulatory issues. With five core national practice groups — Business, Labor and Employment, Intellectual Property, Litigation, and Tax — the firm has more than 970 lawyers located in 14 offices coast to coast. BakerHostetler is widely regarded as having one of the country’s top 10 tax practices, a nationally recognized litigation practice, an award-winning data privacy practice and an industry-leading business practice. The firm is also recognized internationally for its groundbreaking work recovering more than $13 billion in the Madoff Recovery Initiative, representing the SIPA Trustee for the liquidation of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC. Visit bakerlaw.com
A Virginia District Court has denied conditional certification of a class of chauffeurs in claims for unpaid overtime and has also recognized the application of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541, to the calculation of damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
United States Employment and HR

A Virginia District Court has denied conditional certification of a class of chauffeurs in claims for unpaid overtime and has also recognized the application of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 131 S. Ct. 2541 (2011), to the calculation of damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act. 

In Amir v. Sunny's Executive Sedan Service, Inc., Civil Action No. 1:13-cv-161 (E.D. Va., July 30, 2013), the plaintiffs were chauffeurs working in the Washington D.C. area who claimed that they were denied overtime and minimum.  They sought to represent a class of approximately 50 chauffeurs performing services for the company.  Some worked as independent contractors.  Some were paid by commission, while others were paid under other arrangements including, at times, hourly rates. 

Given the difference in pay structures, the court found that the claims would "necessitate individual factual inquiries and defenses which are inappropriate to resolve as a class."  It thus found that the plaintiffs were not similarly situated and that due to reasons of "judicial economy" even conditional certification was not appropriate. 

Interestingly, the court also found that the case could not be resolved on a class basis due to the difficulty in calculating damages.  Citing the Dukes case, the court found that "Trial by Formula" was not appropriate and that the case could not be resolved on either liability or damages without an individual inquiry.  Finding a lack of similarly situated claims and difficulties with resolving the case on a class-wide basis under Dukes, the court denied conditional certification.  While the decision denying conditional certification itself was worthy of note, this additional reason, recognizing Dukes' application in the conditional certification was particularly significant.

The Bottom Line:

Some courts will consider judicial economy and practical issues of case management even at the conditional certification stage.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More