Davenport v. Charter Commc'ns, LLC

Decision Date04 August 2014
Docket NumberCase No. 4:12CV00007 AGF.
Citation35 F.Supp.3d 1040
CourtU.S. District Court — Eastern District of Missouri
PartiesPenny DAVENPORT, et al., individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, LLC, Defendant.

Mark A. Potashnick, Weinhaus and Potashnick, St. Louis, MO, Samuel W. Moore, Russell C. Riggan, Riggan Law Firm, LLC, Kirkwood, MO, for Plaintiffs.

Milton Betts, pro se.

Lisa Broyles, pro se.

Cynthia Chiebana, pro se.

Anisha Coleman, pro se.

Kim Clay Douglas, pro se.

Matthew F. Bozada, pro se.

Michelle Ann Gilbert, pro se.

Neva N. Glenn, pro se.

Tammy Miller Jascur, pro se.

Carlos Jenkins, pro se.

James Moore, pro se.

Ian Nelson, pro se.

Delores Thompson, pro se.

Jeannie Dishon, pro se.

June Dortch, pro se.

Janet Howes, pro se.

Jonathan Julian, pro se.

Mark J. Macaluso, pro se.

Kasim Muhamed, pro se.

Ricardo Jr. Perez, pro se.

Dennis Allen, pro se.

David Ardis, pro se.

David Atwood, pro se.

Shirley Baker, pro se.

Larry J. Bates Jr., pro se.

James M. Bruce, pro se.

Aintree Capri Jones, pro se.

Derek Deyoung, pro se.

Chris Diedrich, pro se.

Stephanie Evans, pro se.

Kyle Lee Griffin, pro se.

Klonda Grigsby, pro se.

Chris Gutterman, pro se.

James Holder, pro se.

Suzanne M. Jensen, pro se.

Kachelle Jones, pro se.

Rodney Lennox, pro se.

James Lemke, pro se.

Tara R. Lester–Danky, pro se.

Shaphan Marlow, pro se.

Kimberly Morrow, pro se.

Ryan Scott Masching, pro se.

Christi Micklatcher, pro se.

Thomas J. Norton, pro se.

Cindy Olson, pro se.

Crystal L. Pendleton, pro se.

Jennifer Price, pro se.

Christopher Seastrom, pro se.

Danielle Stone, pro se.

Cornelius Strawder, pro se.

Justin Tittel, pro se.

Shelly M. Uttendorfer, pro se.

Stacey Winter, pro se.

Rachel Witkowski, pro se.

William Yancy, pro se.

Steve Young, pro se.

Patrick Blackmon, pro se.

Lamondo Braggs, pro se.

Devin F. Brown, pro se.

Tamika Buckley, pro se.

Douglas A. Busch, pro se.

Michael K. Charloff, pro se.

Victoria M. Childers, pro se.

Catherine Gifford, pro se.

Deborah L. Grady, pro se.

Duane Grogans, pro se.

Brooke Hagood, pro se.

Whitney Hall, pro se.

Eric Jon Hill, pro se.

Rhona Holtzinger, pro se.

Aaron C. Inks, pro se.

Kelly Jones, pro se.

Kelly Jones, pro se.

A. Jean–Luc Lafont, pro se.

Julie A. Nimmer–Clark, pro se.

Kara Oconnell, pro se.

Maria S. Osorio, pro se.

Mary Anne Patterson, pro se.

Frank Pearce, pro se.

James D. Rainey, pro se.

James D. Roarx, pro se.

Michelle D. Ross, pro se.

Amanda Schenk, pro se.

Janna Michelle Schultz, pro se.

Rodney Smith, pro se.

Joyce Starling, pro se.

Samuel Sturgeon III, pro se.

Jasonn S. Teamer, pro se.

Kevin Watson, pro se.

Siobhan Williams, pro se.

Amanda Adams, pro se.

Jessica Alexander, pro se.

Jane Averill–Roznowski, pro se.

Jason E. Blair, pro se.

Karen I. Bork, pro se.

India Bridgewater, pro se.

Lois Brown, pro se.

Katie Buchanan, pro se.

Marlon Byfeld Jr., pro se.

Nick Cassaday, pro se.

Brittany Cassidy, pro se.

Richard Colon, pro se.

Tony Coppelletti, pro se.

Mandy Cotton, pro se.

Pina Cureton, pro se.

William Alan Crosby, pro se.

Adam Dalton, pro se.

Cortney Estes, pro se.

Robert Estes, pro se.

Melinda Flaherty, pro se.

Melissa Franklin, pro se.

Beth Friede, pro se.

John Gage, pro se.

Adam Hall, pro se.

Chelsey Hall, pro se.

Martha P. Hayes, pro se.

Kaili Hess, pro se.

Bruce Hevelhurst, pro se.

Michael Johnson, pro se.

Michael Joubert Jr., pro se.

Dennis E. Kirchner, pro se.

Rebekah Lambert, pro se.

Catherine E. Lampman, pro se.

Gina Lese, pro se.

Joezetta Maria McKee, pro se.

Rita Martin Middleton, pro se.

Mildred Miller, pro se.

Shiobhan Nhean, pro se.

Somnang Nhean, pro se.

Robert Ochoa, pro se.

Latoya Ogburn, pro se.

Johntai Olive, pro se.

Linda Osytek, pro se.

David Piccicuto, pro se.

Heather J. Richardson, pro se.

Sal Rivera, pro se.

Tiffany G. Rosa, pro se.

Rachel Roller–Meloy, pro se.

Nicole Leeanne Sadler, pro se.

Roy T. Santolini, pro se.

Katie A. Schwenker, pro se.

Shana Sherard, pro se.

Tycee Skinner, pro se.

Richard T. Sluder, pro se.

Luopu Smith, pro se.

Lynn Smith, pro se.

Jennifer Stevenin, pro se.

Saron Thimijan, pro se.

Jean Thompson, pro se.

Kathleen Wheatcraft Thornsberry, pro se.

Ryan Thornton, pro se.

Angelina M. Triscari, pro se.

Larry M. Troy, pro se.

Shaunna Ware, pro se.

Daniel Waskevich, pro se.

Lisa Waskevich, pro se.

Bradley T. Wheeler, pro se.

Mary A. Wheeler, pro se.

Jason T. White, pro se.

James Vavrek, pro se.

Angela K. Young, pro se.

Sarah Blanchard, pro se.

Carolyn Blassingam, pro se.

Anita Collins, pro se.

Jeriecka Coleman, pro se.

Daniel Cook, pro se.

Sabina Cunningham, pro se.

Phillip Dominguez, pro se.

Genora Flemmings, pro se.

Isaura Garcia, pro se.

Nathan Alan Gorby, pro se.

Zachary Hallmark, pro se.

Pamela Jones, pro se.

Quan Lieu, pro se.

Sabrina McCoy, pro se.

Joshua Murry, pro se.

Joseph G. Neeland, pro se.

Rayond Ray, pro se.

Nancy L. Ring, pro se.

Glenn R. Rode, pro se.

Carmen Rodriguez, pro se.

Richard Saephan–Lee, pro se.

Wayne Dean Schnare Jr., pro se.

Jillian Smith, pro se.

Heather Trauth, pro se.

Lisa L. Turner, pro se.

Kristina Wilson, pro se.

Athena Daun Willis–Casciano, pro se.

Keyona Allen, pro se.

Milachi Bjorngaard, pro se.

Vicki Blakemore, pro se.

Steven Carmer, pro se.

Tamara Chamberlain, pro se.

Marquita Coleman, pro se.

Eric Connor, pro se.

Susan M. Costanza, pro se.

Stacy Croley, pro se.

Robert W. Dionne, pro se.

Brandy Draper, pro se.

Daniel Fritz, pro se.

Yolanda Frontiera, pro se.

Stephanie Gervais, pro se.

Gaelen Hammond, pro se.

Lorraine Harpe, pro se.

Alyssa Hodgerney, pro se.

Gwendolyn Hopson, pro se.

Thomas A. Hughes, pro se.

Bessie James, pro se.

Jean M. Julien, pro se.

Patrick J. Keeley, pro se.

Matt Lawas, pro se.

Cecelia Malm, pro se.

Luke Cash Mansfield, pro se.

Eric I. May, pro se.

Shanae Michalak, pro se.

Sam Nikopoulos, pro se.

Mark Oldenhoff, pro se.

Amanda Overall, pro se.

Matthew S. Prebluda, pro se.

Wendy M. Proctor, pro se.

Jessica Rennu, pro se.

Rose L. Roberts, pro se.

Sherrell Sanford, pro se.

Susan L. Schipper, pro se.

Jacubus Schwitters, pro se.

Samuel Simms, pro se.

Neil Sipress, pro se.

Sara Smoody, pro se.

Tiffany Spadie, pro se.

Charles B. Spencer II, pro se.

Derek Strickland, pro se.

Denise A. Swygert, pro se.

Robert N. Talcott, pro se.

Susan Veenema, pro se.

Deborah Kay Walker, pro se.

Russell K. Witcraft, pro se.

April Wood, pro se.

Sunaide Wright, pro se.

Patrick Aleman, pro se.

Jacob Bright, pro se.

Joseph Daley II, pro se.

Nickole Demers, pro se.

Samantha Finne, pro se.

Tyler Forbus, pro se.

Melissa Griggs, pro se.

Lori B. Jewett–Thede, pro se.

Jody L. Ludewig, pro se.

Brandon Lynch, pro se.

Tracy Medes, pro se.

Clifford A. Godiner, Laura M. Jordan, Roy N. Williams, Tabitha G. Davisson, Thompson Coburn, LLP, St. Louis, MO, for Defendant.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

AUDREY G. FLEISSIG, District Judge.

This putative class and collective action is before the Court on several related motions. Defendant Charter Communications, LLC (“Charter”) moves (Doc. No. 183) for judgment on the pleadings as to Plaintiffs' request for class relief in their claim for unpaid overtime wages under the Kentucky Wages and Hours Act (“Kentucky Act”), Ky.Rev.Stat. § 337.010 et seq., (Count VI), and as to Plaintiffs' entire claim for unpaid overtime wages under the Michigan Minimum Wage Law (Michigan Act), Mich. Comp. Laws § 408.381 et seq.1 (Count VII). Plaintiffs move (Docs. No. 143 & 145) to certify Counts VI and VII as class actions pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. Alternatively, in the event that the Court dismisses Count VI's request for Rule 23 class relief, Plaintiffs move (Doc. No. 191) for conditional certification of Count VI as an opt-in collective action under the Kentucky Act. For the reasons set forth below, the Court shall GRANT Charter's motion for judgment on the pleadings and DENY Plaintiffs' motions for certification of Counts VI and VII as class actions under Rule 23 and for conditional certification of Count VI.2

BACKGROUND

Penny Davenport and three other named Plaintiffs brought this action on their own behalf and on behalf of other former or present call center employees (“CCEs”) who worked on an hourly basis at Charter's call centers in Missouri, Kentucky, or Michigan, at a time when Charter did not pay CCEs for the time it took them to access computer applications when beginning work and to close down computer applications at the end of work.

In Count VI of the amended complaint (Doc. No. 69), Plaintiffs seek unpaid overtime wages under the Kentucky Act, and in Count VII, Plaintiffs seek unpaid overtime wages under the Michigan Act. Both counts are brought as putative class actions, and Plaintiffs have moved to certify both counts as class actions under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Charter argues that Plaintiffs' class allegations and request for class relief under Count VI should be dismissed because Section 337.385 of the Kentucky Act prohibits class relief for overtime claims. Charter also argues that Plaintiffs' entire claim under Count VII should be dismissed because, as an employer subject to the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., Charter is exempt from liability under the Michigan Act.

Regarding Count VI, Plaintiffs argue that the authority on which Charter relies regarding its interpretation of the Kentucky Act is not binding, and in any event, any state prohibition on class actions would be preempted by Rule 23 and the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 151 et seq. Regarding Count VII, Plaintiffs argue that Charter's admission in its answer to the amended complaint that the two named plaintiffs who worked at Charter's Michigan call center were “entitled to the rights, protections, and benefits provided under [the Michigan Act] defeats its exemption argument, or alternatively, that Charter waived its right to claim exemption under the Michigan Act because it failed to plead that argument as an affirmative defense.

In the alternative, Plaintiffs also move separately for conditional certification of Count VI as an opt-in collective action in the event that the Court dismisses Count VI's request for Rule 23 class relief. Plaintiffs argue that the Court may borrow the conditional certification standards applicable to opt-in collective...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT