Totte et al v. Quick Lane Oil & Lube et al
Filing
35
MEMORANDUM Signed by District Judge Avern Cohn. (MVer)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
TOM TOTTE, CODY HITCH and
JOHN MERRELL, individually and
on behalf of others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.
Case No. 16-12850
QUICK LANE OIL & LUBE, INC., a
Michigan for-profit company, and
TALHA HARES, its owner,
Defendants.
HON. AVERN COHN
___________________________________/
MEMORANDUM
On March 29, 2017, the Court granted plaintiffs’ motion for conditional
certification of a collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act, (Doc. 7).
(Doc. 33).
The decision contained the following provision:
. . . The Court will separately enter an order regarding collective
action procedures attached to which will be the form of the opt-in notice to
be sent to potential plaintiffs.
Within 30 days of entry of this decision, plaintiffs, after conferring
with defendants, shall lodge with the Court a draft of the proposed order
and form of notice. If there are objections, within 21 days of receipt,
defendants shall lodge with the Court a redlined version with additions,
deletions or modifications to the text in another color.
(Doc. 33 at 2-3).
The parties disagree on the form of the notice and order as to collective action
procedures. In particular, they disagree on who will be responsible for sending,
collecting and filing the notices.
Plaintiffs say their counsel should administer the notices. Defendants
propose a third-party claims administrator.
The Court will accede to defendants’ preference in this circumstance. The
expense of the claims administrator shall be borne by the defendants.
Simultaneous with this memorandum, the Court has entered an order as
to collective action procedures, attached to which is a notice of right to opt-in.
S/Avern Cohn
AVERN COHN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Dated: April 28, 2017
Detroit, Michigan
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?