Pruitt et al v. Act Fast Delivery, Inc. et al

Western District of Texas, txwd-5:2019-cv-00049

ANSWER to [1] Complaint, by Mike D Miller.

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION SANDRA PRUITT, JASMINE § HUNTSBERRY,YUVANNDA § WATSON, A YAN NUR, and KAREN § LAWSON, Individually and § On Behalf of All Others Similarly § Situated, § Plaintiffs, § § V. § § C.A. No. 5:19-CV-00049-DAE ACT FAST DELIVERY, INC.; ACT § FAST COURIER OF TEXAS, INC.; § ACT FAST DELIVERY OF § HOUSTON, INC.; ACT FAST OF § COASTAL BEND, INC.; ACT FAST § DELIVERY OF S.A., INC.; ACT § FAST DELIVERY OF TYLER, § INC.; ACT FAST DELIVERY OF § TRAVIS COUNTY, INC.; and § MIKE MILLER; § Defendants § DEFENDANT MIKE MILLER'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS' ORIGINAL COMPLAINT SUBJECT TO MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION [RELATES TO DOC. NO. 1] TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT: COME NOW Defendant Mike Miller and respond to the allegations contained in Plaintiffs' Original Complaint as follows: I. Specific Admissions and Denials 1. The allegations of Paragraph 1 of the Complaint are not directed at Defendant and therefore no response is required. Defendant Mike Miller's Answer to Plaintiffs' Original Complaint Subject to Motion to Compel Arbitration Page I o/9 2. The allegations of Paragraph 2 of the Complaint are not directed at Defendant and therefore no response is required. 3. The allegations of Paragraph 3 of the Complaint are denied. 4. The allegations of Paragraph 4 of the Complaint are denied. 5. The allegations of Paragraph 5 of the Complaint are not directed at Defendant and therefore no response is required, except Defendant denies there are other similarly situated employees. 6. The allegations of Paragraph 6 of the Complaint are admitted. 7. The allegations of Paragraph 7 of the Complaint are admitted. 8. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 8. 9. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 9. 10. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 10. 11. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 11. 12. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 12. 13. The allegations of Paragraph 13 of the Complaint are admitted. 14. The allegations of Paragraph 14 of the Complaint are admitted. 15. The allegations of Paragraph 15 of the Complaint are admitted. 16. The allegations of Paragraph 16 of the Complaint are admitted. Defendant Mike Miller's Answer to Plaintiffs' Original Complaint Subject to Motion to Compel Arbitration Page2o/9 17. The allegations of Paragraph 17 of the Complaint are admitted. 18. The allegations of Paragraph 18 of the Complaint are admitted. 19. The allegations of Paragraph 19 of the Complaint are admitted. 20. The allegations of Paragraph 20 of the Complaint are admitted. 21. The allegations of Paragraph 21 of the Complaint are denied. 22. The allegations of Paragraph 22 of the Complaint are denied except as follows: Defendant admit the Act Fast entities have similar names. 23. The allegations of Paragraph 23 of the Complaint are not directed at Defendant and therefore no response is required. To the extent an admission or denial is required, Defendant denies the allegations of Paragraph 23 of the Complaint. 24. The allegations of Paragraph 24 of the Complaint are denied. 25. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 25. 26. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 26. 27. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 27. 28. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 28. 29. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 29. 30. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 30. Defendant Mike Miller's Answer to Plaintiffs' Original Complaint Subject to Motion to Compel Arbitration Page3o/9 31. The allegations of Paragraph 31 are denied. 32. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 32. 33. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 33. 34. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 34. 35. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 35. 36. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 36. 37. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 37. 38. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 38. 39. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 39. 40. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 40. 41. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 41. 42. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 42. Defendant Mike Miller's Answer to Plaintiffs' Original Complaint Subject to Motion to Compel Arbitration Page4of9 43. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 43. 44. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 44. 45. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 45. 46. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 46. 47. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 47. 48. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 48. 49. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 49. 50. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 50. 51. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 51. 52. The allegations of Paragraph 52 are a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required the allegations are denied. 53. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 53. Defendant Mike Miller's Answer to Plaintiffs' Original Complaint Subject to Motion to Compel Arbitration PageSo/9 54. The allegations of Paragraph 54 of the Complaint are not directed at Defendant and therefore no response is required. 55. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 55. 56. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 56. 57. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 57. 58. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 58. 59. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 59. 60. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 60. 61. The allegations of Paragraph 61 are a legal conclusion to which no response is required. To the extent a response is required the allegations are denied. 62. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 62. 63. The allegations of Paragraph 63 of the Complaint are not directed at Defendant and therefore no response is required. 64. The allegations of Paragraph 64 of the Complaint are not directed at Defendant and therefore no response is required. Defendant Mike Miller's Answer to Plaintiffs' Original Complaint Subject to Motion to Compel Arbitration Page6o/9 65. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 65. 66. The allegations of Paragraph 66 of the Complaint are not directed at Defendant and therefore no response is required. 67. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 67. 68. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 68. 69. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 69. 70. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 70. 71. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 71. 72. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 72. 73. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 73. 74. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 74. 75. Defendant lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief about the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 75. Defendant Mike Miller's Answer to Plaintiffs' Original Complaint Subject to Motion to Compel Arbitration Page 7of9 76. The allegations of Paragraph 76 of the Complaint are not directed at Defendant and therefore no response is required. 77. The allegations of Paragraph 75 are denied. II. Affirmative Defenses 78. Plaintiff is not entitled to recover compensation for time not compensable under the FLSA. 79. Defendant denies that this matter is appropriate for ce1iification as a collective action under the FLSA. Additionally, Defendant denies that Plaintiffs are an adequate and/or proper representative of the purported collective action class for which she seeks to represent. 80. Defendant assert that Plaintiffs were independent contractors. 81. Defendant pleads offset and overpayment credits as allowed by applicable law. 82. Defendant asserts the defense of good faith, reasonableness and 29 U.S.C. §260. WHEREFORE, Defendant Mike Miller respectfully requests that Plaintiffs take nothing by their suit and that Defendant have and recover costs and such other and further relief, general or special, legal or equitable, to which they may be justly entitled. Respectfully submitted, By: Isl Joseph F Colvin, Jr. Joseph F. Colvin, Jr. TBN: 24072777 Hughes Watters Askanase, L.L.P. Total Plaza 1201 Louisiana, 28 th Floor Houston, Texas 77002 Phone:(713) 759-0818 Fax: (713) 759-6834 jcolvin@hwa.com ATTORNEY-IN-CHARGE FOR DEFENDANT Defendant Mike Miller's Answer to Plaintiffs' Original Complaint Subject to Motion to Compel Arbitration Page 8of9 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of Defendant Mike Miller's Answer to Plaintiffs' Original Complaint Subject to Motion to Compel Arbitration was served on the following counsel ofrecord via the Court's ECF Filing System on the 7th day of June 2019: Melissa Moore melissa(@mooreandassociates.net Curt Christopher Hesse curt@mooreandassociates.net Bridget Dale Davidson bridget(a),mooreandassociates.net Moore & Associates Lyric Center 440 Louisiana, Ste. 675 Houston, Texas 77002 By: Isl Joseph F. Colvin, Jr. Joseph F. Colvin, Jr. Defendant Mike Miller's Answer to Plaintiffs' Original Complaint Subject to Motion to Compel Arbitration Page 9of9