Denton v. Conveyor Technology et al

Filing 94

JUDGMENT in favor of Conveyor Technology & Components Inc, Justin Carmody against Gloria Denton re 92 93 Jury Verdicts in the amount of $24,225.00, together with post-judgment interest at the rate of 0.14% per annum from the date of the Judgment until paid. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 6/7/13. (kpr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
WESTERN DIVISION
GLORIA DENTON
v.

PLAINTIFF
No. 4:12CV00191 KGB

CONVEYOR TECHNOLOGY & COMPONENTS, INC.,
Individually and d/b/a CONVEYOR TECHNOLOGY
AND COMPONENTS, INC., and JUSTIN CARMODY

DEFENDANTS

JUDGMENT
This matter came for jury trial on the 3rd day of June, 2013. Plaintiff Gloria Denton
appeared through her attorneys Vanessa Kinney and Cheslee Sizemore Mahan. Defendants
Conveyor Technology & Components, Inc., individually and d/b/a Conveyor Technology and
Components, Inc. (“Conveyor Technology”) and Justin Carmody appeared through their attorney
Lloyd W. Kitchens III. All parties announced ready for trial. A jury of twelve was duly selected
and sworn.
On June 6, 2013, the jury returned a verdict as follows:

VERDICT ON GLORIA DENTON’S CLAIM
Your verdict on Gloria Denton’s claim will be determined by your answers to the
following questions. Make sure that you read the questions and notes carefully because they
explain the order in which the questions should be answered and which questions may be
skipped.
Question No. 1:

Do you find that Gloria Denton has proved the elements located in

Instruction No. 8?
Yes ____
No
X
(Mark an AX@ in the appropriate space)
Note: If you answered ANo@ to the above question, you should have your foreperson sign and
date this form and turn it in because you have completed your deliberations on this claim.
If you answered AYes@ to the above question, please proceed to Question Nos. 2-4.
Question No. 2:

Do you find for Conveyor Technology and Components, Inc. and

Justin Carmody under Instruction No. 19 for the time period between October 17, 2010,
and August 20, 2011?
Yes ____
No ____
(Mark an AX@ in the appropriate space)
Question No. 3:

Do you find for Conveyor Technology and Components, Inc. and

Justin Carmody under Instruction No. 19 for the time period between August 21, 2011,
and November 19, 2011?
Yes ____
No ____
(Mark an AX@ in the appropriate space)
Question No. 4:

Do you find for Conveyor Technology and Components, Inc. and

Justin Carmody under Instruction No. 19 for the time period between November 20,
2011, and January 20, 2012?
Yes ____
No ____
(Mark an AX@ in the appropriate space)
Note: If you answered AYes@ to Question Nos. 2, 3, and 4, you should have your foreperson
sign and date this form because you have completed your deliberations on this claim. If
you answered ANo@ to Question No. 2, 3, or 4, please proceed to Question No. 5.

Question No. 5:

For each workweek on the attached table, state Gloria Denton’s

hours worked, as that term is defined in Instruction No. 9.
_________________________________________________
(Number of hours worked)
Note: Proceed to Question No. 6.
Question No. 6:

For each workweek on the attached table, state the amount that

Gloria Denton should have been paid in minimum wage, as set forth in Instruction No.
16.
____________________________________________________
(State the amount)
Note: Proceed to Question No. 7.
Question No. 7:

For each workweek on the attached table, state the amount that

Gloria Denton should have been paid in overtime compensation, as set forth in
Instruction No. 17.
_______________________________________________________
(State the amount)
Note: Proceed to Question No. 8.
Question No. 8:

For each workweek in the attached table, state the amount of

wages that you find Gloria Denton was actually paid by Conveyor Technology and
Components, Inc. and Justin Carmody.
___________________________________________________________
(State the amount)
Note: Proceed to Question No. 9.
Question No. 9:

For each of the periods set forth below, state the amount of Gloria

Denton’s damages as that term is defined in Instruction No. 20:

$______________

for the time period between October 17, 2010, and August 20,
2011

$______________

for the time period between August 21, 2011, and November 19,
2011

$______________

for the time period between November 20, 2011, and January 20,
2012

Note: Proceed to Question No. 10.
Question No. 10:

Do you find that Conveyor Technology and Component, Inc.’s and

Justin Carmody’s failure to pay minimum wage and/or overtime was willful as defined in
Instruction No. 21?

Yes ____
No ____
(Mark an AX@ in the appropriate space)

/s/ Tiffany O’Dwyer
Foreperson

Date: 6-6-13

Workweek
Beginning
Date

Workweek
Ending Date

10/17/2010

10/23/2010

10/24/2010

10/30/2010

10/31/2010

11/6/2010

11/7/2010

11/13/2010

11/14/2010

11/20/2010

11/21/2010

11/27/2010

11/28/2010

12/4/2010

12/5/2010

12/11/2010

12/12/2010

12/18/2010

12/19/2010

12/25/2010

12/26/2010

1/1/2011

1/2/2011

1/8/2011

1/9/2011

1/15/2011

1/16/2011

1/22/2011

1/23/2011

1/29/2011

1/30/2011

2/5/2011

2/6/2011

2/12/2011

2/13/2011

2/19/2011

2/20/2011

2/26/2011

Hours
Worked

Minimum
Wage That
Should Have
Been Paid

Overtime
Compensation That
Should Have Been
Paid

Wages
Actually
Paid

2/27/2011

3/5/2011

3/6/2011

3/12/2011

3/13/2011

3/19/2011

3/20/2011

3/26/2011

3/27/2011

4/2/2011

4/3/2011

4/9/2011

4/10/2011

4/16/2011

4/17/2011

4/23/2011

4/24/2011

4/30/2011

5/1/2011

5/7/2011

5/8/2011

5/14/2011

5/15/2011

5/21/2011

5/22/2011

5/28/2011

5/29/2011

6/4/2011

6/5/2011

6/11/2011

6/12/2011

6/18/2011

6/19/2011

6/25/2011

6/26/2011

7/2/2011

7/3/2011

7/9/2011

7/10/2011

7/16/2011

7/17/2011

7/23/2011

7/24/2011

7/30/2011

7/31/2011

8/6/2011

8/7/2011

8/13/2011

8/14/2011

8/20/2011

8/21/2011

8/27/2011

8/28/2011

9/3/2011

9/4/2011

9/10/2011

9/11/2011

9/17/2011

9/18/2011

9/24/2011

9/25/2011

10/1/2011

10/2/2011

10/8/2011

10/9/2011

10/15/2011

10/16/2011

10/22/2011

10/23/2011

10/29/2011

10/30/2011

11/5/2011

11/6/2011

11/12/2011

11/13/2011

11/19/2011

11/20/2011

11/26/2011

11/27/2011

12/3/2011

12/4/2011

12/10/2011

12/11/2011

12/17/2011

12/18/2011

12/24/2011

12/25/2011

12/31/2011

1/1/2012

1/7/2012

1/8/2012

1/14/2012

1/15/2012

1/21/2012

VERDICT ON JUSTIN CARMODY’S CLAIM
Your verdict on Justin Carmody’s claim will be determined by your answers to the
following questions. Make sure that you read the questions and notes carefully because they
explain the order in which the questions should be answered and which questions may be
skipped.
Question No. 1: Do you find that that Justin Carmody has proved the elements located in
Instruction No. 22?
Yes X
No ____
(Mark an AX@ in the appropriate space)
Note: If you answered ANo@ to the above question, you should have your foreperson sign and
date this form and turn it in because you have completed your deliberations on this claim.
If you answered AYes@ to the above question, please proceed to Question Nos. 2-3.
Question No. 2: State the amount of Justin Carmody’s compensatory damages:
$9,225.00
Question No. 3: State the amount of Justin Carmody’s punitive damages as set forth in
Instruction No. 23:
$15,000.00

/s/ Tiffany O’Dwyer
Foreperson

Date: 6-6-13

Judgment is entered on the jury’s verdict in favor of Conveyor Technology and Justin
Carmody and against Gloria Denton in the amount of $24,225.00, together with post-judgment
interest at the rate of 0.14% per annum from the date of the Judgment until paid.1
SO ORDERED this 7th day of June, 2013.

____________________________________
Kristine G. Baker
United States District Judge

1

Counsel for Gloria Denton made an oral motion to set aside the verdict after it was
announced. The Court has that motion under advisement and, as indicated in open court, will
accept briefing on the issues raised in the motion. See generally Presutti v. FDIC, 24 Fed. Appx.
92, 94 (2d Cir. 2001); Ohio-Sealy Mattress Mfg. Co. v. Sealy, Inc., 585 F.2d 821, 846 (7th Cir.
1978).