Tweet
The chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit might not be the biggest Miami Marlins fan—or one at all. In a decision Friday, Ed Carnes at once revived a class action on behalf of construction workers for the baseball team’s new stadium—while, at the same time, noting the Marlins’ “unremarkable record.” (The team, for the record, lost 85 games this season.)
In Arle Calderon et al. v. Form Works/Baker JV LLC, construction workers appealed the dismissal of their putative class action, brought in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida court in April 2013. The suit, filed on behalf of all former employees of the construction contractor Form Works who participated in building the stadium, was defeated on subject matter jurisdiction grounds.
In their original complaint, the plaintiffs had referred to claims related to unpaid and underpaid overtime compensation, federal causes of action according to the Fair Standards Labor Act. But they did not cite them again in a subsequent statement of claims, focusing instead on allegations that the workers were underpaid because they were misclassified under a Miami-Dade county ordinance that sets a variable minimum wage for different categories of construction work.
As a result, Form Works moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the second set of claims.
The district court initially ruled it did have subject matter jurisdiction, because the misclassification claims were tied to overpay claims under the FSLA. But when Form Works threatened an interlocutory appeal, the court reversed its decision, ruling it did not have jurisdiction over the claims.
In his ruling, Carnes argued that the plaintiffs had not lost subject matter jurisdiction by failing to refer to allegations of FLSA violations in the statement of claims, a local practice that is not required under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and as such, he wrote, “does not have the status of a pleading and … is not an amendment.”
In Arle Calderon et al. v. Form Works/Baker JV LLC, construction workers appealed the dismissal of their putative class action, brought in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida court in April 2013. The suit, filed on behalf of all former employees of the construction contractor Form Works who participated in building the stadium, was defeated on subject matter jurisdiction grounds.
In their original complaint, the plaintiffs had referred to claims related to unpaid and underpaid overtime compensation, federal causes of action according to the Fair Standards Labor Act. But they did not cite them again in a subsequent statement of claims, focusing instead on allegations that the workers were underpaid because they were misclassified under a Miami-Dade county ordinance that sets a variable minimum wage for different categories of construction work.
As a result, Form Works moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the second set of claims.
The district court initially ruled it did have subject matter jurisdiction, because the misclassification claims were tied to overpay claims under the FSLA. But when Form Works threatened an interlocutory appeal, the court reversed its decision, ruling it did not have jurisdiction over the claims.
In his ruling, Carnes argued that the plaintiffs had not lost subject matter jurisdiction by failing to refer to allegations of FLSA violations in the statement of claims, a local practice that is not required under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and as such, he wrote, “does not have the status of a pleading and … is not an amendment.”
text of the decision here: http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/Arle%...20decision.pdf