Davis et al v. TitleMax of Alabama, Inc. et al

Filing 25

OPINION AND ORDER: it is ORDERED that the dfts' 10 motion to transfer be and is hereby GRANTED and that this case be and is hereby transferred to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama; DIRECTING the Clerk to take the necessary action to transfer this case to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama. Signed by Honorable Judge Emily C. Marks on 1/7/2019. (wcl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
JESSICA DAVIS, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
TITLEMAX OF ALBAMA, INC., and
TMX FINANCE LLC,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CIV. ACT. NO. 2:17cv488-ECM
(WO)

OPINION and ORDER
In this action, the plaintiffs seek to pursue a collective action against the
defendants for violations of the Fair Labors Standard Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq.
(doc. 1). This matter is now pending before the Court on defendant TitleMax of
Alabama, Inc.’s motion to transfer venue, dismiss and strike collective action claims
and compel individual arbitration (doc. 10).1 The defendant seeks to transfer venue
to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama asserting
that the plaintiffs are required to arbitrate their claims in that District. (Doc. 10 at 12). In a motion to stay, the plaintiffs concede that they signed arbitration agreements
but asserted that the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Epic Sys. Corp. v.
Ernst &Young, 138 S.Ct. 1612 (2018) would “decide whether these plaintiffs must

1
   Also pending before the Court is defendant TMX’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction (doc. 11).
Because this matter is due to be transferred to the Southern District of Alabama, the court declines to
resolve that motion at this time.

submit to arbitration or whether their collective action case may proceed.” (Doc. #
15 at 2, ¶ 4). Thereafter, on May 21, 2018, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in
Epic Sys. Corp., supra., which supports the defendant’s position that the plaintiffs
can be compelled to arbitrate their claims.
On November 30, 2018, the Court ordered the plaintiffs to show cause why
the motion to transfer should not be granted in light of the Supreme Court’s decision
in Epic Sys. Corp., supra. (Doc. 23). On December 20, 2018, the plaintiffs
responded and “concede[d] that the Motion to Transfer contained in Doc. 10, should
be granted, and that this case be transferred to the Southern District of Alabama.”
(Doc. 24).
Accordingly, upon an independent review of the pleadings and for good cause,
it is
ORDERED that the defendants’ motion to transfer (doc. 10) be and is hereby
GRANTED and that this case be and is hereby transferred to the United States
District Court for the Southern District of Alabama.
The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to take the necessary action to transfer
this case to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama.
DONE this 7th day of January, 2019.
/s/ Emily C. Marks
EMILY C. MARKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE