Nicholas Peterson v. M.J.J., Inc.


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:16-cv-03629-JKB. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000283055]. [17-2088]

Download PDF
Appeal: 17-2088 Doc: 13 Filed: 04/26/2018 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 17-2088 NICHOLAS PETERSON; JENA B. DANSON; CALI FITZGERALD, On Behalf of Themselves and Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs - Appellants, and JANE LYNN HUBE; RYAN SCHOCHET; ERICA LYNN BLUNT; ROBYN SLACK; CLAUDIA CHAPPELLE; JEFFREY STREET, Plaintiffs, v. M.J.J., INC., trading as The Suburban House; MARK HOROWITZ, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, Chief District Judge. (1:16-cv-03629-JKB) Submitted: March 29, 2018 Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Decided: April 26, 2018 Appeal: 17-2088 Doc: 13 Filed: 04/26/2018 Pg: 2 of 3 Howard Benjamin Hoffman, HOWARD B. HOFFMAN, ESQ, ATTORNEY AT LAW, Rockville, Maryland; Stephen Jon Springer, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, for Appellants. Mark Horowitz, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 Appeal: 17-2088 Doc: 13 Filed: 04/26/2018 Pg: 3 of 3 PER CURIAM: Nicholas Peterson, Jena B. Danson, and Cali Fitzgerald appeal the district court’s order dismissing their civil action alleging that the Defendants violated the minimum wage and overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C.A. §§ 201-219 (West 2018), the Maryland Wage and Hour Law, Md. Code Ann., Lab. & Empl. §§ 3-401 to 3431 (LexisNexis 2016 & Supp. 2017), and the Maryland Wage Payment and Collection Law, Md. Code Ann., Lab. & Empl. §§ 3-501 to 3-509 (LexisNexis 2016). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Peterson v. M.J.J., Inc., No. 1:16-cv-03629-JKB (D. Md., Sept. 14, 2017). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?