Straight_Eighty_Lawsuit
Member
- Messages
- 5
Some of you may remember the lawsuit filed in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims against the Agency last year for its failure to pay timely overtime wages in violation of the FLSA. Please refer to THIS POST.
That case is in full swing. Discovery is still in progress and several motions/responses/orders have been filed/entered. Hundreds of employees throughout the NAS have joined, and numerous others continue to contact me and/or the law firm to report incidents of untimely payment of wages at their facilities.
Most recently, I was contacted by a number of individuals at ZDV who informed me that they received another straight-80 paycheck on the last pay period (PP17).
Counsel for the the Agency is objecting to the addition of more plaintiffs/incidents to the current case, noting that the deadline to do so has passed.
The solution is to file a second lawsuit in order to include more incidents along with the most recent one at ZDV.
Our legal team is drafting the new complaint, which will be filed in Federal court shortly. There is a possibility the new case may be combined with the original one for sake of an expeditious resolution, as the issues in both cases are identical.
The lead attorney on the original lawsuit mentioned in the previous forum post, Danny Rosenthal, is on parental leave until October. A team of attorneys, including Firm partners Olga Thall and Michael Ellement, are currently working on the case. I correspond with them on a regular basis about the case and they have been nothing but a pleasure to work with.
If you are interested in joining this new lawsuit -or if you have been denied timely overtime payment at your facility in the previous 3 years- attached is a copy of the latest revision of the retainer agreement. Please do no hesitate to contact Olga or Michael with any questions and/or a consultation. I hyperlinked their contact info to their names above.
The fee arrangement for this case is on a contingency basis, which means that if there is no recovery and/or the Agency prevails, no out-of-pocket expenses will have to be paid by the co-plaintiffs.
If you have general questions, feel free to post here or PM me and I will try to answer them. However, please understand that I am not a member of the Bar and will have to exercise caution not engage in behavior that could be construed as Unauthorized Practice of Law (UPL). I am available to share GENERAL information about the cases and answer GENERAL questions, but I am prohibited from giving you legal advice tailored to your specific situation. Another consideration is that anything posted on this forum and/or any private exchanges I have with others about this case is subject to production during the discovery phase of litigation. For these reasons I would encourage you to direct any questions other than those of a very general nature directly to Olga or Michael. Communication between you and the attorneys will likely be deemed privileged and not subject to production during discovery. This will protect me, you, the class, and the cases in general. Thank you for your understanding.
That case is in full swing. Discovery is still in progress and several motions/responses/orders have been filed/entered. Hundreds of employees throughout the NAS have joined, and numerous others continue to contact me and/or the law firm to report incidents of untimely payment of wages at their facilities.
Most recently, I was contacted by a number of individuals at ZDV who informed me that they received another straight-80 paycheck on the last pay period (PP17).
Counsel for the the Agency is objecting to the addition of more plaintiffs/incidents to the current case, noting that the deadline to do so has passed.
The solution is to file a second lawsuit in order to include more incidents along with the most recent one at ZDV.
Our legal team is drafting the new complaint, which will be filed in Federal court shortly. There is a possibility the new case may be combined with the original one for sake of an expeditious resolution, as the issues in both cases are identical.
The lead attorney on the original lawsuit mentioned in the previous forum post, Danny Rosenthal, is on parental leave until October. A team of attorneys, including Firm partners Olga Thall and Michael Ellement, are currently working on the case. I correspond with them on a regular basis about the case and they have been nothing but a pleasure to work with.
If you are interested in joining this new lawsuit -or if you have been denied timely overtime payment at your facility in the previous 3 years- attached is a copy of the latest revision of the retainer agreement. Please do no hesitate to contact Olga or Michael with any questions and/or a consultation. I hyperlinked their contact info to their names above.
The fee arrangement for this case is on a contingency basis, which means that if there is no recovery and/or the Agency prevails, no out-of-pocket expenses will have to be paid by the co-plaintiffs.
If you have general questions, feel free to post here or PM me and I will try to answer them. However, please understand that I am not a member of the Bar and will have to exercise caution not engage in behavior that could be construed as Unauthorized Practice of Law (UPL). I am available to share GENERAL information about the cases and answer GENERAL questions, but I am prohibited from giving you legal advice tailored to your specific situation. Another consideration is that anything posted on this forum and/or any private exchanges I have with others about this case is subject to production during the discovery phase of litigation. For these reasons I would encourage you to direct any questions other than those of a very general nature directly to Olga or Michael. Communication between you and the attorneys will likely be deemed privileged and not subject to production during discovery. This will protect me, you, the class, and the cases in general. Thank you for your understanding.
Last edited:
