Morgan v. Sundance, Inc.

Morgan v. Sundance, Inc.

Opinion

ORDER

This matter comes before the Court pursuant to Defendant's November 11, 2018, Motion to Dismiss or Stay. [Dkt. No. 9]. Plaintiff responded to the Motion on November 21, 2018. [Dkt. No. 10]. Defendant replied on November 28, 2018. [Dkt. No. 11]. For the reasons that follow, Defendant's Motion is DENIED.

I. Background

This lawsuit

On September 25, 2018, Robyn Morgan filed this action against Sundance, Inc., a Michigan corporation that owns over a hundred Taco Bell restaurants throughout six Midwestern states. Morgan, a former Crew Member at the Osceola, Iowa, Taco Bell, alleges that her former employer violated the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), [*2]  29 U.S.C. §§ 201-219, and seeks to certify a putative collective action pursuant to § 216 of the FLSA. In specific, Morgan contends that "Sundance engages in a process in which it 'shifts' hours that an employee works during one week over to the following week," as well as, for some employees, simply capping the employees' paychecks at 80 hours per two week period. These practices, she alleges, violate the FLSA's minimum wage requirements and its guarantee of a minimum wage and enhanced pay for overtime work. Morgan seeks to include in her action "all other Crew Members and other hourly employees who have worked for Sundance at any time between the three years before the commencement of this action and the date of final judgment in this matter." [Dkt. No. 1, at 4].

In response, Sundance filed the Motion now before the Court. In its Motion to Dismiss or Alternatively Stay, Sundance argues that Morgan's lawsuit should be dismissed or stayed pursuant to the first to file rule, arguing that it is duplicative of a collective action that has been proceeding for over two years in the Eastern District of Michigan.

The Wood action

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.