Taylor v. C6 Disposal Systems, Inc.

Western District of Texas, txwd-5:2019-cv-00347

Plaintiff Taylor's ANSWER to {{5}} Answer to Complaint, Counterclaim, by Charles Taylor.

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION CHARLES TAYLOR, § Individually and on behalf § Civil Action No. 5:19-CV-00347-ESC of all others similarly situated § § Plaintiff, § JURY TRIAL DEMANDED § v. § COLLECTIVE ACTION § PURSUANT TO 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) C6 DISPOSAL SYSTEMS, INC. § § CLASS ACTION PURSUANT TO Defendant. § FED. R. CIV. P. 23 PLAINTIFF TAYLOR'S ANSWER TO C6 DISPOSAL SYSTEMS, INC.'S COUNTERCLAIM Plaintiff Charles Taylor ("Taylor") files this Answer to C6 Disposal Systems. Inc.'s (C6) Answer and Counterclaim, and would respectfully show the following: I. SPECIFIC ADMISSIONS AND DENIALS 1. Plaintiff denies that C6 has a compulsory state law counterclaim that this Court would have subject matter jurisdiction over pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1367(a) as stated in paragraph 88 of C6's Answer and Counterclaim. 2. Plaintiff is without sufficient information to admit or deny, and, therefore denies the allegations contained in paragraph 89 of C6's Answer and Counterclaim. 3. Plaintiff is without sufficient information to admit or deny, and, therefore denies the allegations contained in paragraph 90 of C6's Answer and Counterclaim. 4. Plaintiff denies the allegations contained in paragraph 91 of C6's Answer and Counterclaim. 5. Plaintiff admits that he certified his C6 timesheets on a daily basis which confirmed that he had taken his lunch break as stated in paragraph 92 of C6's Answer and Counterclaim. Plaintiff Plaintiff's Answer to Defendant's Counterclaim Page 1 denies the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 92 of C6's Answer and Counterclaim. Plaintiff denies that he certified his C6 timesheets voluntarily. Plaintiff Taylor had to certify he took his lunch break, even when C6 did not allow him to take a lunch break, because he would face disciplinary action by C6 if he did not certify his records. Plaintiff certified his records under order by C6. Paragraph number 92 is used twice in C6's Answer and complaint and this answer refers to the first use of paragraph 92 which contains a different allegation than the second paragraph 92. 6. Plaintiff is without sufficient information to admit or deny, and, therefore denies the allegations contained in paragraph 92 of C6's Answer and Counterclaim. Paragraph number 92 is used twice in C6's Answer and complaint and this denial refers to the second use of paragraph 92 which contains a different allegation than the first paragraph 92. 7. Plaintiff is without sufficient information to admit or deny, and, therefore denies the allegations contained in paragraph 93 of C6's Answer and Counterclaim. 8. Plaintiff is without sufficient information to admit or deny, and, therefore denies the allegations contained in paragraph 94 of C6's Answer and Counterclaim. 9. Plaintiff admits that he certified his time sheets on a daily basis but only under order by C6. Plaintiff denies the remaining allegations contained in paragraph 95 of C6's Answer and Counterclaim. C6 was aware Plaintiff was not taking his breaks as C6 could track Plaintiff's vehicle's GPS and any reasonable investigation by C6 would clearly show Plaintiff did not stop take a full uninterrupted thirty (30) minute break every day. Further, Plaintiff did inform C6 he did not take a full uninterrupted thirty (30) minute break every day. 10. Plaintiff admits that Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Republic Services on August 16, 2017 in the Southern District of Texas, Corpus Christi Division. Plaintiff admits that the lawsuit Taylor v. Republic Services, Inc. was dismissed pursuant to a settlement in April of 2018 and that Plaintiff had Plaintiff's Answer to Defendant's Counterclaim Page 2 the same counsel representing him as in this present matter as stated in paragraph 96 of C6's Answer and Counterclaim. 11. Plaintiff denies the allegations stated in paragraph 97 of C6's Answer and Counterclaim. 12. Plaintiff denies the allegations stated in paragraph 98 of C6's Answer and Counterclaim. Plaintiff did inform C6 that he did not take a full uninterrupted thirty (30) minute lunch break every day. 13. To the extent Paragraph 99 of C6's Answer and Counterclaim contains a recitation of Defendant's understanding of the law, no response is necessary. Plaintiff denies the factual allegations contained in paragraph 99 of C6's Answer and Counterclaim. 14. Paragraph 100 of C6's Answer and Counterclaim contains a recitation of Defendant's understanding of the law, and does not contain any factual allegations that must, or can, be admitted or denied. Nevertheless, to the extent that it contains factual allegations, Plaintiff denies the allegations contained in paragraph 100 of C6's Answer and Counterclaim. 15. Plaintiff denies that C6 is entitled to the relief sough in paragraph 101 of C6's Answer and Counterclaim, and deny any factual allegations that may be contained in such paragraph. II. RELIEF SOUGHT Plaintiff prays that Defendant take nothing by way of its Counterclaim, and for all other relief to which he may justly be entitled. Plaintiff's Answer to Defendant's Counterclaim Page 3 Date: July 1, 2019 Respectfully submitted, ANDERSON ALEXANDER, PLLC By: /s/ Clif Alexander Clif Alexander Texas Bar No. 24064805 clif@a2xlaw.com Lauren E. Braddy Texas Bar No. 24071993 lauren@a2xlaw.com Alan Clifton Gordon Texas Bar No. 00793838 cgordon@a2xlaw.com Carter T. Hastings Texas Bar No. 24101879 carter@a2xlaw.com 819 N. Upper Broadway Corpus Christi, Texas 78401 Telephone: (361) 452-1279 Facsimile: (361) 452-1284 Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members Plaintiff's Answer to Defendant's Counterclaim Page 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on July 1, 2019, I electronically filed the foregoing document with the clerk of the court for the U.S. District Court, Western District of Texas using the electronic case filing system of the court. The electronic case filing system sent a "Notice of Electronic Filing" to the attorneys of record who have consented in writing to accept this Notice as service of this document by electronic means. /s/ Clif Alexander Clif Alexander Plaintiff's Answer to Defendant's Counterclaim Page 5