Holt et al v. Waffle House, Inc. et al

Filing 51

ORDER granting 49 Motion. On or before June 19, 2017, Plaintiffs are directed to show cause why this action should be permitted to proceed in light of the pending Jones Action. Signed by Judge Roy B. Dalton, Jr. on 6/7/2017. (VMF)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION ALEX HOLT; MICHELLE DANIELS; LARRY WASHINGTON; MARKO FREEMAN; JOHN POINDEXTER; NIKKI SYKES; PAULA SBABO; WO DAVIS; JOHN AGAPOS; PAULA JOHNSON; SHAWNTA POWELL; CELESTE HINES; JENNIFER SPONSELLER; MARNETTA JACKSON; FLORENCE MIMS; CONSTANCE HUNTER; CASSANDRA MCCLINTON; SHAY TUCKER; REGINA LUCKETT; ASHLEY MARTIN, Plaintiffs, v. Case No. 6:17-cv-693-Orl-37GJK WAFFLE HOUSE, INC.; WH CAPITAL, LLC; THE SOURCE FOR PUBLIC DATA, L.P.; SHADOWSOFT, INC.; HARLINGTON-STRAKER-STUDIO, INC.; and DALE BRUCE STRINGFELLOW, Defendants. _____________________________________ ORDER In this putative class action, Plaintiffs allege that Defendants violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) with respect to background checks conducted for prospective and current employees of Waffle House restaurants. (See Doc. 1 (“Complaint”).) Plaintiffs filed their Complaint on April 17, 2017; thus, their motion to certify the putative class is currently due on or before Monday, July 17, 2017 -1- (“Certification Deadline”). See Local Rule 4.04(b) (allotting ninety days following the filing of the initial complaint in which to file a motion to maintain a case as a class action). Presently, Plaintiffs have moved for relief from the Certification Deadline to allow them time to conduct discovery prior to filing a motion for class certification (Doc. 49 (“Motion for Relief”).) To this end, the Motion for Relief references the parties’ Case Management Report, which proposes a November 3, 2017 deadline for the submission of a class certification motion (“Proposed Deadline”). (See Doc. 47, p. 2.) Plaintiffs also point out that Defendants’ response to the Complaint is not due until Wednesday, July 19, 2017 (Doc. 49, p. 1)—two days following the Certification Deadline. The Motion for Relief is unopposed. (Id. at 3.) Upon consideration, the Court finds that the Motion for Relief is due to be granted. Hence Plaintiffs are relieved from the Certification Deadline. To allow Plaintiffs time to file a “meaningful motion for class certification,” the Court will take the parties’ Proposed Deadline under advisement in constructing the Case Management and Scheduling Order. In addition, the instant action asserts FCRA claims that are remarkably similar to claims asserted in an earlier-filed, putative class action against the same Defendants. (Compare Doc. 1, with Jones v. Waffle House, Inc., Case No. 6:15-cv-1637-Orl-37GJK, Doc. 1 (M.D. Fla. Oct. 1, 2015) (“Jones Action”).). 1 Because both actions attempt to certify overlapping nationwide classes, the Court will require Plaintiffs to show cause, by written response, why the instant, later-filed action should be permitted to proceed. Notably, the plaintiff in the Jones Action is represented by the same counsel as Plaintiffs in the instant action. 1 -2-

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?