Fox v. Martin Transportation Systems Inc, No. 1:2008cv00305 - Document 43 (N.D. Ind. 2010)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING 40 MOTION to Exclude James Shaw from Collective Action under the Fair Labor Standards Act (Unopposed) filed by Brian Fox. Signed by Judge Theresa L Springmann on 8/23/10. (jcp)

Download PDF
Fox v. Martin Transportation Systems Inc Doc. 43 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA FORT WAYNE DIVISION BRIAN FOX, on behalf of himself and other similarly-situated, Plaintiffs, v. MARTIN TRANSPORTATION, SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CAUSE NO.: 1:08-CV-305-TLS OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion to Exclude James Shaw from Collective Action under the Fair Labor Standards Act [DE 40], filed on July 20, 2010. This is an action to recover past due overtime compensation under 29 U.S.C. § 216(b). When an opt-in plaintiff is not a named party plaintiff the opt-in plaintiff’s case commences when filing an opt-in notice. 29 U.S.C. § 256. The Notice by Brian Fox of Individual Opting into Collective Action (James Shaw) [DE 36] states that Mr. Shaw’s last day of employment with the Defendant was November 7, 2006 (DE 36-2 at 7 (answer to question 1)). Mr. Shaw filed his opt-in notice on January 19, 2010, which was more than three years after the end of Mr. Shaw’s employment with the Defendant. Therefore, Mr. Shaw’s claim is time barred by the FLSA.1 29 U.S.C. § 255. Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion to Exclude James Shaw from Collective Action under the Fair Labor Standards Act [DE 40] is GRANTED and the Court ORDERS James Shaw to be excluded 1 The Court is not ruling which limitations period in 29 U.S.C. § 255(a) applies. Mr. Shaw’s claim is time barred by the longest possible statutory limitations period in § 255(a). Dockets.Justia.com from the Collective Action. SO ORDERED on August 23, 2010. s/ Theresa L. Springmann THERESA L. SPRINGMANN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.