Berger v. Perry's Steakhouse of Ill., LLC
United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division
December 23, 2019, Decided; December 23, 2019, Filed
No. 14 C 8543
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
In this partial class and collective action, Plaintiffs, who worked as table servers at Perry's Steakhouse and Grille in Oak Brook, Illinois ("Perry's Oak Brook"), allege that Perry's Steakhouse of Illinois, [*2] LLC ("PSI"), which operates Perry's Oak Brook, and managers Howard Cortes and Jeffery Pagnotta (PSI, Cortes and Pagnotta collectively, "Defendants") failed to pay them all tips and other compensation owed, required them to perform non-table-service-related work at less than minimum wage, and failed to give them adequate notice of their intent to take a "tip credit" and use a "tip pool" in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Illinois Minimum Wage Law. Plaintiffs also seek relief under the Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act, and under breach of contract and unjust enrichment theories. The parties filed cross motions for partial summary judgment. For the following reasons, both motions are granted in part and denied in part. R. 306; R. 312.
Summary judgment is appropriate "if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(a); see also Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23, 106 S. Ct. 2548, 91 L. Ed. 2d 265 (1986). The Court considers the entire evidentiary record and must view all of the evidence and draw all reasonable inferences from that evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmovant. Horton v. Pobjecky, 883 F.3d 941, 948 (7th Cir. 2018). To defeat summary judgment, a nonmovant must produce more [*3] than a "mere scintilla of evidence" and come forward with "specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial." Johnson v. Advocate Health and Hosps. Corp., 892 F.3d 887, 894, 896 (7th Cir. 2018). Ultimately, summary judgment is warranted only if a reasonable jury could not return a verdict for the nonmovant. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 248, 106 S. Ct. 2505, 91 L. Ed. 2d 202 (1986).
BackgroundRead The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 219751 *; 2019 WL 7049925
JESSICA BERGER and TIMOTHY RENDAK, ET AL., Plaintiffs, v. PERRY'S STEAKHOUSE OF ILLINOIS, LLC, HOWARD CORTES, and JEFFREY PAGNOTTA, Defendants.
Prior History: Berger v. PIKR, Ltd., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60414 (N.D. Ill., May 8, 2015)
tip, pool, offset, servers, DOL, Plaintiffs', sidework, notice, minimum wage, credit card, employees, summary judgment, regulation, lawsuit, willful, opinion letter, unjust enrichment, restaurant, deference, liquidated damages, new interpretation, non-tipped, unrelated, opening, posters, checkout, dual, good faith, declaration, preempted