BREAKING NEWS!!
Updated on 12/29/09
On December 22, 2009, Judge Shira Scheindlin issued an opinion bringing to a close the litigation in this matter. Click here to see Judge Scheindlin’s opinion. Plaintiffs’ counsel are determining the proper allocation of damages. We anticipate that damage payments will be made in the first quarter of 2010.
Updated 12/21/09
On December 18, 2009, Judge Scheindlin held a hearing to assess the fairness of the proposed settlement. The hearing was brief, and no Plaintiffs spoke when invited to do so by the Judge. At the end of the hearing, Judge Scheindlin took the matter under advisement, indicating she would be preparing a written opinion on the matter. We expect a decision within the next 60 days.
Updated 11/6/09
There is a provisional settlement of the FLSA lawsuit against the New York City Police Department and the City of New York. Please click here to read about it.
Updated 8/5/09
On July 30, 2009, Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Appeal to the federal Second Circuit Court of Appeals. We’ll have more information on the appeal in upcoming weeks. Still pending before Judge Scheindlin is Plaintiffs’ motion for attorney fees and litigation costs.
Updated 7/14/09
The judge has just released her order, which awards the Plaintiffs $900,000 in damages. We’re now in the period where each side is evaluating whether to appeal the decision. There has been no determination on how the $900,000 would be distributed among the plaintiffs.
Updated 4/1/09
As of April 1, the Judge has ordered both parties to make written submissions on the issue of damages. We anticipate this will be done by mid to late April. When this occurs, the case will be fully submitted to the judge, and will await only her decision.
Updated 12/4/08
Through a combination of a jury verdict and the decisions of Judge Shira Scheindlin, most of the lawsuit has now been resolved. Here’s a summary of the decisions and rulings over the three weeks of the trial:
1. Judge Scheindlin ruled that the City’s failure to pay overtime for those occasions when the chart produces more than 171 hours of work in a 28-day period violates the FLSA. The jury later found that the City’s violation was “willful.” The impact of this finding is that Plaintiffs with this claim will be entitled to damages going back three years before they filed the lawsuit instead of the FLSA’s normal two-year statute of limitations.
2. Judge Scheindlin ruled that the City violated the FLSA in the way it calculated the overtime rate by not properly including all differentials in the overtime calculations. The jury later found that this violation was also “willful,” entitling Plaintiffs with the claim to a three-year statute of limitations.
3. On the claim that NYPD has an unlawful “cash overtime cap,” Judge Scheindlin ruled that because of the variety of different alleged caps in NYPD, the claim should not proceed as a class action. She “decertified” the claim for all except the four named plaintiffs who testified in the lawsuit. The jury then found that two of the four named plaintiffs had been subject to an unlawful overtime cap.
The “decertification” of the cap claims means that all Plaintiffs other than the four named Plaintiffs will have their cap claims dismissed “without prejudice.” That means that the Plaintiffs are free to refile their lawsuits, either individually or in some class configuration that would satisfy the judge’s rulings. Under a Supreme Court decision, where claims are dismissed without prejudice because of class action status, no time is lost from the statute of limitations if the case is refiled.
4. On the claim that NYPD unlawfully fails to compensate officers for less than 15 minutes of overtime, the jury found that the City did have a policy of not compensating officers for such time, but that the City’s violation was de minimis. Under the FLSA, a de minimis violation occurs where uncompensated time is worked but is infrequent enough and small enough in duration as to not require payment.
5. The jury found that NYPD did not unlawfully deny NYPD officers the right to use their FLSA comp time. Much of the jury’s finding on this issue was shaped by earlier rulings made by Judge Scheindlin over the course of the litigation.
Judge Scheindlin has now dismissed the jury. The expert witness for the Plaintiffs, Dr. Murray Simpson, will now be calculating damages. If there are any disputes in his damage calculations, Judge Scheindlin will resolve them. After that process is complete, Judge Scheindlin will decide whether to award “liquidated” or double damages on the claims. She will also make an award of attorney fees to the Plaintiffs.
Once this process is complete, the damage award will be reduced to a judgment signed by Judge Scheindlin. At that point, either or both sides can appeal the judgment to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.
Updated 11/7/08
The trial begins on Monday, November 10, 2008. On November 3, 2008, Judge Scheindlin presided over jury selection and a panel of 10 jurors was selected. The jury is comprised of six women and four men. Trial is scheduled to last six weeks. As things proceed in trial, we'll continue to post updates on this website.
Updated 9/12/08
The case is now rapidly moving towards its trial date, which has been set by federal District Court Judge Shira Scheindlin as November 10, 2008. Judge Scheindlin estimates that the trial will consume the last six weeks of the year.
The judge has now ruled on the summary judgment motions filed by both sides. The Judge granted portions of the plaintiffs' summary judgment motion, and denied the City's motion in its entirety. You can read her decision by clicking on this link. Judge's Decision (Be patient, it's a large file, so it may take a few minutes to load.)
We'll keep you posted as more developments occur.
Updated 8/1/08
As we previously mentioned, Judge Scheindlin has ordered that the trial proceed on a "representative plaintiff" basis. That means that instead of all 15,811 plaintiffs giving evidence in some form or another, the facts in the case will be developed through 250 representative plaintiffs. The representative plaintiffs were randomly selected, using a statistical computer program to which both the City and the plaintiffs' lawyers agreed. Some portion of the 250 representative plaintiffs will be called as witnesses in the trial.
Both sides have filed what are called “summary judgment” motions, essentially asking the judge to resolve major aspects of the case in their favor without the need for a jury trial. Judge Scheindlin is considering the summary judgment motions, and will likely rule on them before the end of August. Her rulings on the motions could greatly impact the scope and length of a trial.
We'll keep you posted as more developments occur.