{"id":456,"date":"2023-04-26T08:49:46","date_gmt":"2023-04-26T12:49:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/classactiondefense\/?p=456"},"modified":"2023-07-05T15:28:35","modified_gmt":"2023-07-05T19:28:35","slug":"federal-court-in-new-hampshire-grants-conditional-certification-in-wage-hour-litigation-after-deciding-the-first-stage-standard-applies","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/classactiondefense\/2023\/04\/26\/federal-court-in-new-hampshire-grants-conditional-certification-in-wage-hour-litigation-after-deciding-the-first-stage-standard-applies\/","title":{"rendered":"Federal Court In New Hampshire Grants Conditional Certification In Wage & Hour Litigation After Deciding The First-Stage Standard Applies"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>By Michael DeMarino and Gerald L. Maatman, Jr.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Duane Morris Takeaways<\/em><\/strong> \u2013 \u00a0In McCarthy v. Medicus Healthcare Sols., LLC, No. 1:21-CV-668, 2023 WL 2989051, at *1 (D.N.H. Apr. 18, 2023), the U.S. District Court for the District Court of New Hampshire granted<\/a> conditional certification of a collective action consisting of physician recruiters who alleged that they did not receive overtime wages for all earned overtime hours in violation of the FLSA.\u00a0 Although the plaintiff\u2019s motion for conditional certification came late in the procedural posture of the case, the Court nonetheless applied the more lenient first-stage conditional certification standard often relied upon in FLSA collective actions. The decision in McCarthy is an important one as it highlights the ongoing battle between litigants over the standard for conditional certification of a FLSA collective action when the parties have engaged in significant discovery.<\/em><\/p>\n

Background Of The Case <\/strong><\/p>\n

Plaintiff, a recruiter, worked for Medicus, a nationwide physician recruitment and medical staffing company.\u00a0 Plaintiff alleged that Medicus misclassified him and other alleged similarly-situated employees as a \u201cnon-exempt\u201d employee under the FLSA, and failed to pay him overtime compensation for working over 40 hours in a workweek in violation of the FLSA.<\/p>\n

Prior to answering the complaint,\u00a0Medicus\u00a0twice moved to dismiss the original complaint on statute of limitations grounds.\u00a0 The Court denied those motions,\u00a0Medicus\u00a0answered the complaint, and the parties proceeded to discovery.\u00a0 During discovery, the parties unsuccessfully attempted to resolve the dispute at mediation. Afterwards, Plaintiff filed his motion for conditional certification of a collective action.<\/p>\n

The Court\u2019s Ruling <\/strong><\/p>\n

In opposing Plaintiff\u2019s motion for conditional certification, Medicus argued that because Plaintiff filed the motion \u201cnear the end of the case\u201d and the parties had engaged in \u201cextensive discovery,\u201d the Court should apply the heightened standard applicable to the later, decertification stage.\u00a0 Under that standard, which typically occurs after the defendant moves to decertify the collective action, the Court makes \u201ca factual determination as to whether there are similarly-situated employees who have opted in.\u201d\u00a0 Id<\/em>. at *2.<\/p>\n

In response, Plaintiff argued that he should \u201cnot be prejudiced for pausing the litigation (and delaying the filing of this motion) to attempt to resolve the case at a pre-certification mediation, and the more lenient first-stage standard should apply.\u201d\u00a0 Id.<\/em>\u00a0 Under this standard, \u201cPlaintiffs bear the light burden of demonstrating that there is a reasonable basis for their claim that there are other similarly-situated employees.\u201d\u00a0 Id<\/em>. at *1.<\/p>\n

The Court agreed with Plaintiff. It concluded that Plaintiff provided a \u201creasonable explanation for the alleged delay in filing.\u201d Id<\/em>. at *4.\u00a0 The Court also noted that numerous case law authorities had \u201capplied the lenient standard under similar procedural circumstances, including after the parties engaged in substantial discovery.\u201d Id<\/em>. at *3. The Court opined that because conditional certification is ultimately a \u201ccase management tool,\u201d it has broad discretion to manage its cases and apply the lenient first-stage standard.\u00a0 Id<\/em>. at *4.<\/p>\n

Applying the lenient first-stage standard, the Court rejected Medicus\u2019s arguments that inconsistencies in Plaintiff\u2019s evidence precluded conditional certification and that certain facts admitted in Plaintiff\u2019s deposition give rise to individualized defenses. Instead, the Court held that for \u201cpurposes of this motion,\u201d it need not \u201cresolve factual disputes, decide substantive issues going to the ultimate merits, or make credibility determinations.\u2019\u201d Id<\/em>. at *8.\u00a0 Over Medicus\u2019s objection, the Court granted Plaintiff\u2019s motion for conditional certification.<\/p>\n

Implications For Companies Facing FLSA Collective Actions <\/strong><\/p>\n

The ruling in McCarthy <\/em>underscores how the first-stage and second-stage certification standards in FLSA actions can impact the case and drive the decision whether to send FLSA notice to potential collective action members.\u00a0 Although the defendant was ultimately unsuccessful in getting out from under the lenient first-stage standard, corporate defendants facing FLSA collective actions still should push for the heightened second-stage standard when the parties have engaged in some amount of discovery.\u00a0 Whether a court will apply the first or second-stage standard generally will turn on the amount of discovery conducted and the reason for plaintiff\u2019s delay in moving for conditional certification.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By Michael DeMarino and Gerald L. Maatman, Jr. Duane Morris Takeaways \u2013 \u00a0In McCarthy v. Medicus Healthcare Sols., LLC, No. 1:21-CV-668, 2023 WL 2989051, at *1 (D.N.H. Apr. 18, 2023), the U.S. District Court for the District Court of New Hampshire granted conditional certification of a collective action consisting of physician recruiters who alleged that … <\/p>\n

Continue reading “Federal Court In New Hampshire Grants Conditional Certification In Wage & Hour Litigation After Deciding The First-Stage Standard Applies”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":575,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[37],"tags":[],"ppma_author":[7],"class_list":["post-456","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-class-certification-motions"],"authors":[{"term_id":7,"user_id":575,"is_guest":0,"slug":"gmaatman","display_name":"Gerald L. Maatman, Jr.","avatar_url":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/classactiondefense\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/56\/2022\/09\/maatmangerald-100x100.jpg","0":null,"1":"","2":"","3":"","4":"","5":"","6":"","7":"","8":""}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/classactiondefense\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/456","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/classactiondefense\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/classactiondefense\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/classactiondefense\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/575"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/classactiondefense\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=456"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/classactiondefense\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/456\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/classactiondefense\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=456"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/classactiondefense\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=456"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/classactiondefense\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=456"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.duanemorris.com\/classactiondefense\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/ppma_author?post=456"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}