Todd v. Daewon America, Inc.
OPINION AND ORDER that defendant Daewon America, Inc.'s motion to strike 20 is denied. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 2/13/2013. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Appeals Checklist)(jg, )
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, EASTERN DIVISION
DAEWON AMERICA, INC.,
CIVIL ACTION NO.
OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Kelvin Todd brings this lawsuit under the
Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. §§ 201-219, on
behalf of himself and others similarly situated, alleging
that his former employer, defendant Daewon America, Inc.,
violated the FLSA’s overtime-pay provisions.
is before the court on Daewon’s motion to strike evidence
from the record.
For reasons that will be discussed, the
motion will be denied.
Daewon asks the court to strike three exhibits that
Todd filed in support of his motion for conditional
certification of a FLSA collective action.
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure restrict the use
of a motion to strike to the pleadings.
A motion to
strike is not an appropriate vehicle for a general attack
Lowery v. Hoffman, 188 F.R.D. 651, 653 (M.D. Ala 1999)
(Thompson, J.); Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f); see also 2 James
Wm. Moore, et al., Moore's Federal Practice § 12.37 
(3d ed.1999) ("Only material included in a ‘pleading' may
be subject of a motion to strike....
Motions, briefs or
memoranda, objections, or affidavits may not be attacked
by the motion to strike.").
Rather, the court will
consider Daewon’s motion to strike as notice of its
objections to Todd’s evidentiary submissions.
Daewon objects that Todd’s exhibits fail to meet the
requirements for admissibility in the Federal Rules of
Evidence and “were prepared by an unnamed, unidentified
Def. Mot. (Doc. No. 20) at ¶ 4.
does not share its concerns.
The three exhibits at issue
demonstrate how the rounding practices resulted in the
See Bury v. Marietta
aids--and helpful ones, at that.
clarifies in his reply to the motion to strike that his
attorneys prepared the charts.
Moreover, the technical requirements of the Federal
Rules of Evidence need not be met at this early stage.
rulings so long as they can be reduced to admissible form
Longcrier v. HL-A Co., Inc., 595 F.Supp. 2d
1218, 1223 (S.D. Ala. 2008) (Steele, J.) (citing Rowell
v. BellSouth Corp., 433 F.3d 794, 800 (11th Cir. 2005)
and U.S. Aviation Underwriters, Inc. v. Yellow Freight
System, Inc., 296 F.Supp. 2d 1322, 1327 n.2 (S.D. Ala.
demonstrative exhibits Todd submits are readily reducible
to admissible form.
As such, Daewon’s objections to this
evidence are overruled.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that defendant Daewon
America, Inc.’s motion to strike (Doc. No. 20) is denied.
DONE, this the 13th day of February, 2013.
/s/ Myron H. Thompson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?