Not a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Cuevas v. Conam Mgmt. Corp.

United States District Court for the Southern District of California

October 21, 2019, Decided; October 21, 2019, Filed

Case No.: 18cv1189-GPC(LL)

Opinion

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATION; GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR PRODUCTION OF COLLECTIVE MEMBERS' CONTACT INFORMATION; AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF NOTICE TO THE MEMBERS OF THE COLLECTIVES

[Dkt. No. 37.]

Before the Court is Plaintiff Elizabeth Cuevas' motion for an order conditionally certifying the class as a collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), (2) for production of collective members' contact information, and (3) for approval of notice to the members of the collectives. (Dkt. No. 37.) An opposition was filed by Defendant on September 27, 2019. (Dkt. No. 54.) A reply was filed by Plaintiff on October 4, 2019. (Dkt. No. 55.) [*2]  Based on the reasoning below, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's motion for conditional certification of collective action, GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Plaintiff's motion to direct Defendant to produce collective members' contact information, and GRANTS in part and DENIES in part Plaintiff's request for approval of notice to the members of the collectives.

Background

On September 6, 2019, Plaintiff Elizabeth Cuevas ("Plaintiff") filed the operative first amended complaint ("FAC") on behalf of herself and other similarly situated employees of Defendant ConAm Management Corporation ("Defendant" or "ConAm") alleging two causes of action for its failure to pay overtime pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., and failure to timely pay overtime wages as required by 29 C.F.R. § 778.106. (Dkt. No. 48, FAC.) Specifically, Plaintiff claims that Defendant failure to pay overtime is based on its failure to calculate and/or factor non-discretionary bonuses into her regular rate of pay in assessing overtime pay. Second, Plaintiff claims Defendant's Bonus Adjustment or true-up payment pays overtime payments late or not at all. ConAm is a property management and real estate investment company with properties [*3]  located throughout the United States. (Id. ¶ 2.)

Plaintiff was employed by ConAm from about December 21, 20171 to about March 29, 2019 as a non-exempt leasing agent/professional at one of Defendant's properties located in Reno, Nevada. (Dkt. No. 37-3, Cuevas Decl. ¶¶ 2, 3.) In her position as a Leasing Professional, she, as well as other employees, received non-discretionary bonuses from the Lease and Renewal Bonus Program, also referred to as the "Winner's Circle" program. (Id. ¶ 4; Dkt. No. 54-1, Gillane Decl., Ex. A.) In her position as Leasing Professional, Plaintiff was only eligible for the Winner's Circle bonus. (Dkt. No. 54-1, Gillane Decl., Ex. A.) Other non-exempt employees, such as Community Managers and Business Managers are also subject to other non-discretionary bonuses. (Id.; Dkt. No. 57, Dadek Decl., Ex. B (UNDER SEAL).)

Read 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 181832 *; 2019 WL 5320544

ELIZABETH CUEVAS, as an individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. CONAM MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, a California corporation; and does 1 through10, inclusive, Defendants.

Prior History: Cuevas v. ConAm Mgmt. Corp., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41937 (S.D. Cal., Mar. 14, 2019)

CORE TERMS

notice, bonus, employees, certification, opt-in, similarly situated, collective action, non-discretionary, overtime, district court, bonuses, lease, arbitration agreement, arbitration, mailing, true-up, overtime pay, courts, plaintiffs', payroll, non-exempt, argues, social security number, contact information, class member, eligible, join, email address, post notice, calculate