Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

Martin v. Spring Break '83 Prods., LLC

Martin v. Spring Break '83 Prods., LLC

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

July 24, 2012, Filed

No. 11-30671

Opinion

 [*249]  HIGGINSON, Circuit Judge:

Appellants John T. Martin ("J. T. Martin"), Johnathon R. Martin ("J. R. Martin"), Bradley D. Keyes ("Keyes"), and Marty Boger ("Boger") appeal the district court's grant of summary judgment on their Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") claims in favor of Appellees Spring Break '83 Louisiana, L.L.C. ("Spring Break Louisiana"), Mars Callahan ("Callahan"), George Bours ("Bours"), John Hermansen ("Hermansen"), and Randy Chortkoff ("Chortkoff"). We AFFIRM the district court's judgment, concluding that individual Appellees Callahan, Bour, Hermansen, and Chortkoff are not employers under the FLSA and that Appellants released any FLSA claims against Louisiana Spring Break by accepting settlement payments for those claims.

FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS

Appellants J. T. Martin, J. R. Martin, Keyes, and Boger were employed as grips—lighting and rigging technicians in the filmmaking and video production industries—with  [**3] Spring Break Louisiana for the filming of Spring Break '83 (the "movie"). Filming took place between October 6, 2007 and December 22, 2007 in and around Hammond, Louisiana. Throughout this filming period, Appellants were members of the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, Local 478 (the "Union"). In October 2007, the Union entered into a Collective Bargaining Agreement (the "CBA"), with Spring Break Louisiana. Under the CBA, Spring Break Louisiana recognized "the Union as exclusive representative of the employees in the bargaining unit." In addition, the CBA outlined the procedure for Union members to follow when filing grievances against Spring Break Louisiana.

Toward the end of production of the movie, a number of parties to the CBA, including Appellants, filed a grievance against Spring Break Louisiana alleging that they had not been paid wages for work they performed. The Union sent a representative to investigate the merits of the claims. After his investigation, the representative concluded that it would be impossible to determine whether or not Appellants worked on the days they alleged they had worked. The Union and Spring Break Louisiana entered into a Settlement  [**4] Agreement pertaining to the disputed hours allegedly worked by Appellants.

Before the Settlement Agreement was signed by Union representatives on November  [*250]  3, 2009, Appellants filed a lawsuit on June 16, 2009 in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles against Spring Break Productions '83, L.L.C.; Big Sky Motion Pictures, L.L.C.; Spring Break Louisiana; George Bours; John Hermansen; Mars Callahan; and Randy Chortkoff.1 Appellees then removed the case to the United States District Court for the Central District of California, which subsequently transferred the case to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.

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.

688 F.3d 247 *; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 15285 **; 162 Lab. Cas. (CCH) P36,041; 19 Wage & Hour Cas. 2d (BNA) 670; 2012 WL 3011004

JOHN T. MARTIN, an individual; JOHNATHON R. MARTIN, an individual; BRADLEY D. KEYES, an individual; MARTY BOGER, an individual, Plaintiffs-Appellants v. SPRING BREAK '83 PRODUCTIONS, L.L.C., a California Limited Liability Company; SPRING BREAK '83 DISTRIBUTION, L.L.C., a California Limited Liability Company; BIG SKY MOTION PICTURES, L.L.C., a California Limited Liability Company; SPRING BREAK '83 LOUISIANA, L.L.C., a Louisiana Limited Liability Company; GEORGE BOURS, an individual; MARS CALLAHAN, an individual; RANDY CHORTKOFF, an individual; JOHN HEREMANSEN, an individual, Defendants-Third Party Plaintiffs-Appellees; UNIDENTIFIED PARTIES, Does 1 through 10, Defendants - Appellees v. INTERNATIONAL ALLIANCE OF THEATRICAL STAGE EMPLOYEES, Local 478; INTERNATIONAL ALLIANCE OF THEATRICAL STAGE EMPLOYEES, Local 798; INTERNATIONAL ALLIANCE OF THEATRICAL STAGE EMPLOYEES, MOVING PICTURE TECHNICIANS, ARTISTS AND ALLIED CRAFTS OF THE UNITED STATES, ITS TERRITORIES AND CANADA, Third Party Defendants - Appellees

Subsequent History: US Supreme Court certiorari denied by Martin v. Spring Break '83 Prods., L.L.C., 2012 U.S. LEXIS 9425 (U.S., Dec. 10, 2012)

Prior History:  [**1] Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.

Martin v. Spring Break '83 Prod., LLC, 797 F. Supp. 2d 719, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67826 (E.D. La., 2011)

CORE TERMS

settlement agreement, employees, economic reality, district court, settlement, rights, Declaration, bargaining, summary judgment, bona fide dispute, hire, grievance, factors, sworn declaration, no evidence, filming, payroll, waived, movie, method of payment, number of hours, conditions, decisions, supervise, binding, genuine, wages

Civil Procedure, Summary Judgment, Entitlement as Matter of Law, General Overview, Appeals, Summary Judgment Review, Standards of Review, Judgments, Evidentiary Considerations, Need for Trial, Business & Corporate Compliance, Wage & Hour Laws, Scope & Definitions, Minimum Wage, Labor & Employment Law, Remedies, Overtime & Work Periods, Definition of Employers, Collective Bargaining & Labor Relations, Duty of Fair Representation, Settlements, Settlement Agreements, Releases From Liability, General Releases