SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2015 Supreme(US)(ca8) 22

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
Melloy, Benton, Shepherd
Beauford Ex Rel. Cox – Appellant
Versus
ActionLink LLC – Respondent



No. 13-3265 ___________________________

Jennifer Beauford, Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated; Steve Cox, Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated; Elaina Grauer, Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated; Richard S. Levis, Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated; Richard Neidert, Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated; Jill Pate, Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated; Cheryl Songster, Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiffs

v.

ActionLink, LLC

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellee

------------------------------ Karl Adams, III; Donny Banerjee; Michael Breeding; David Caffey; Stephanie Davis; Samvel Davtyam; John Demian; Jason Dorazio; Coley Faulk; Michael Fayfer; Frances Francisco; Kasey Gray; John Karalis; Jason Kelly; John McLouglin, Jr.; Greg Morrison; Terrance Nowak; Ryan Okimoto; Janette Reynolds; Ricardo Rubalcava; Carolee Sabala; Rene Sandoval, Jr.; Jeff Saylors; Gregory Sutton; William Wagoner

lllllllllllllllllllllClaimants - Appellants ___________________________

No. 13-3380 ___________________________

Jennifer Beauford, Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated; Steve Cox, Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated; Elaina Grauer, Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated; Richard S. Levis, Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated; Richard Neidert, Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated; Jill Pate, Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated; Cheryl Songster, Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiffs - Appellees

v.

ActionLink, LLC

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock ____________

Submitted: September 10, 2014 Filed: March 20, 2015 ____________ Before MELLOY, BENTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. ____________ MELLOY, Circuit Judge.

In September 2011, the Department of Labor (DOL) began investigating a complaint that ActionLink, LLC, a marketing company, had misclassified some of its

-2- employees as exempt under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and failed to pay overtime compensation. During the subsequent DOL investigation, ActionLink agreed to reclassify the employees as non-exempt and to pay them their missing back wages. It sent the employees checks with a disclaimer stating that the checks represented "full payment from Actinlink [sic] or [sic] wages earned, including minimum wage and overtime, up to the date of the check." A number of employees cashed the checks; others did not.

Some of the employees then sued ActionLink, claiming that they were entitled to additional pay under the FLSA. The employees moved for partial summary judgment, asking the court to confirm their non-exempt status. ActionLink also moved for summary judgment, denying that it had misclassified the employees and requesting that the district court declare the employees exempt. The district court granted the employees' motion and declared t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top