Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
7 opinions for “Espenscheid, Aaron v. DirectSat USA, LLC”
Aaron Espenscheid v. DirectSat USA, LLCpublic domain
POSNER, Circuit Judge. The three appellants are the named plaintiffs in a class action suit to enforce the Fair Labor Standards Act and parallel state laws. Actually only the supplemental state law claims were brought as class action suits, the suit under the FLSA being brought as a “collective action” under section 16(b) of that Act, 29 U.S.C. § 216(b). The difference (of no cons
Aaron Espenscheid v. DirectSat USApublic domain
POSNER, Circuit Judge. The three appellants are the named plaintiffs in a class action suit (actually a set of such suits) to enforce the Fair Labor Standards Act and parallel state laws governing minimum wages and overtime. Only the supplemental state law claims were brought as class actions, all under Rule 23(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; the claim under the F
Espenscheid v. DIRECTSAT USA, LLCpublic domain
708 F.Supp.2d 781 (2010) Aaron L. ESPENSCHEID, Gary Idler and Ricardo Bolano, on behalf of themselves and a class of employees and/or former employees similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. DIRECTSAT USA, LLC and UniTek USA, LLC, Defendants. No. 09-cv-625-bbc. United States District Court, W.D. Wisconsin. April 13, 2010. *783 Michael
Strait v. Belcan Engineering Group, Inc.public domain
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER AMY J. ST. EVE, District Judge. On February 24, 2011, Plaintiff Matthew Strait (“Strait”) filed a Complaint, for himself and on behalf of similarly situated others, against Defendant Belcan Engi*717neering Group, Inc. (“Belcan”) pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 201 et seq.,
Jonathan R. v. Jim Justicepublic domain
USCA4 Appeal: 21-1868 Doc: 69 Filed: 07/20/2022 Pg: 1 of 45 PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 21-1868 JONATHAN R., minor, by Next Friend, Sarah Dixon; ANASTASIA M., minor, by Next Friend, Cheryl Ord; SERENA S., minor, by Next Friend, Sarah Dixon; THE
Scott v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.public domain
17-2208, 18-359 Scott v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term 2018 (Argued: February 13, 2019 Decided: April 1, 2020) Nos. 17-2208-cv, 18-359-cv MAXCIMO SCOTT, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, JAY FRANCIS ENSOR, CHRISTIN
Daniel Campbell v. City of Los Angelespublic domain
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT DANIEL CAMPBELL; et al, * No. 15-56990 Plaintiffs-Appellants, D.C. No. v. 2:04-cv-08592- AG-AJW CITY OF LOS ANGELES, Defendant-Appellee. CESAR MATA,