VILLAMAR

v.

CARRIER COMPLIANCE SERVICES CORP

S.D. Fla. | 2022-05-24

No. 21-cv-20573

District Court, S.D. Florida (2022)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Holding

The court conditionally certified the action as an FLSA collective action, adopting the magistrate judge's recommendation to limit the class scope to employees in the same office as the plaintiff.

Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiff moved to conditionally certify a collective action under the FLSA. The magistrate judge recommended granting the motion in part, certifying …

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Topics

Magistrate Judge'S Report And Recommendation Review Clear Error Review De Novo Review

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Magistrate Judge'S Report And Recommendation Review cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

Accordingly, after careful consideration, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: (1) Judge Torres’s Report and Recommendation, [ECF No. 60], is ADOPTED in full; (2) Plaintiff’s Motion to Conditionally Certify Collective Action and Facilitate Notice

to Potential Class Members, [ECF No. 41], is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; (3) This action is conditionally certified as an FLSA collective action; (4) Defendants shall produce an electronic and importable spreadsheet that identifies the putative class members by their full names, job titles, dates of employment, mailing addresses, and email addresses within fourteen days of the date of this Order;

DARRIN P. GAYLES

UNITED STATES DI ICT JUDGE

Footnotes

1 The Court notes that to the extent Plaintiff has evidence that Defendants had more than one office in Medley, Florida during the relevant time period such that the class should include employees who worked at any of Defendants’ locations in Medley, Florida, Plaintiff should raise those issues in the first instance before Judge Torres. (5) Plaintiff may not distribute his proposed notice and opt-in forms as they are currently written. Within fourteen days of the date of this Order, Plaintiff shall file an amended proposed notice and opt-in forms that are consistent with this Order for review by Judge Torres; and (6) Once approved by the Court, Plaintiff may distribute the notice and opt-in forms in the manner specified in the report and recommendation. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 24th day of May, 2022.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Authorities Cited

United States v. Schultz, 565 F.3d 1353 (11th Cir. 2009)
Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. Westpoint Underwriters, L.L.C., 2001 WL 1850837 (M.D. Fla. 2001)

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw