Whiteman v. Wardlaw Consulting Services, Inc. et al

Western District of Texas, txwd-6:2016-cv-00312

Defendants' ANSWER to {{1}} Complaint with Jury Demand. Attorney Philip E. McCleery added to party REBECCA W MEADOWS(pty:dft), Attorney Philip E. McCleery added to party MICHAEL N WARDLAW(pty:dft), Attorney Philip E. McCleery added to party William F. Wardlaw(pty:dft), Attorney Philip E. McCleery added to party Wardlaw Consulting Services, Inc.(pty:dft) by REBECCA W MEADOWS, MICHAEL N WARDLAW, William F. Wardlaw, Wardlaw Consulting Services, Inc.

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

Case 6:16-cv-00312-RP-JCM Document 8 Filed 09/06/16 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS TIMOTHY D. WHITEMAN § § Plaintiff, § § V. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:16-CV-312-RP-JCM § WARDLAW CONSULTING SERVICES, § INC., WILLIAM F. WARDLAW, § MICHAEL N. WARDLAW and § REBECCA W. MEADOWS § § Defendants. § DEFENDANTS’ ORIGINAL ANSWER Now comes Wardlaw Consulting Services, Inc., William F. Wardlaw, Michael W. Wardlaw and Rebecca W. Meadows, Defendants and make and file this their Original Answer to Plaintiff’s Original Complaint and for said Answer would show the Court the following: I. PARTIES 1. Defendants have no personal knowledge of Plaintiff’s current residence. Defendants admit that he was a Director for Wardlaw Consulting Services, Inc. 2. Defendants deny that this case is a proper class or collective action case. Defendants deny that Plaintiff was not exempt from the overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Defendants deny the remaining material allegations in paragraph 2. 3. Admit. 06418-001\Whiteman\Orig Answer 1 Case 6:16-cv-00312-RP-JCM Document 8 Filed 09/06/16 Page 2 of 6 4. Defendants admit that William F. Wardlaw is an individual and director of Defendant Wardlaw Consulting Services, Inc. The remaining material allegations in paragraph 4 are denied. 5. Defendants admit that Defendant Michael N. Wardlaw is an individual and director of Defendant Wardlaw Consulting Services, Inc. The remaining material allegations in paragraph 5 are denied. 6. Deny. II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 7. Admit. 8. Admit. 9. Admit. 10. Admit as to the named Plaintiff. Defendants can neither admit or deny as to any other persons. At all times Plaintiff was exempt from the overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act. 11. Deny. 12. Deny. 13. Admit that Plaintiff Timothy D. Whiteman was employed by Defendant Wardlaw Consulting Services, Inc. The allegations as to any other persons can neither be admitted nor denied and are therefore denied. 06418-001\Whiteman\Orig Answer 2 Case 6:16-cv-00312-RP-JCM Document 8 Filed 09/06/16 Page 3 of 6 III. STATEMENT OF FACTS 14. Admit. 15. Admit, except that Defendants have no knowledge about any services performed by Whiteman as a director "outside of normal business hours" and therefore deny that allegation. 16. Defendants deny that this case is appropriate for a class or collective action. Defendants can neither admit nor deny allegations of what Plaintiff estimates and therefore deny the same. The remaining allegations in paragraph 16 are denied. 17. Deny. 18. Plaintiff Timothy D. Whiteman was paid a percentage of certain revenues that varied on a week to week basis. Defendants can neither admit nor deny the remaining allegations in paragraph18 and therefore deny same. 19. Defendants have insufficient knowledge about the allegations in paragraph 19 to admit or deny and therefore they deny said allegations. 20. Deny. 21. Deny. 22. Deny. 23. Deny. 24. Deny. 25. Deny. 06418-001\Whiteman\Orig Answer 3 Case 6:16-cv-00312-RP-JCM Document 8 Filed 09/06/16 Page 4 of 6 26. Defendants deny any and all material allegations in Plaintiff’s Original Complaint not specifically admitted herein. IV. DEFENSES 27. Plaintiff’s claims, in whole or in part, are barred by limitations. 28. Plaintiff, and any other persons similarly situated, at all material times, was employed by Wardlaw Consulting Services, Inc. in a bona fide executive or administrative capacity and, therefore, was an exempt employee as to the overtime pay requirements under the Fair Labor Standards Act in accordance with 29 USC 213. 29. At all material times, Plaintiff was a highly compensated employee exempt from the overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act. 30. The amount of time worked by plaintiff in excess of 40 hours per week, if any, was de minimus and, therefore, Defendants have no liability to Plaintiff for overtime compensation for such time. 31. Defendants William F. Wardlaw, Michael N. Wardlaw and Rebecca W. Meadows were never employers of Plaintiff or any person similarly situated during any relevant time within the meaning of the FLSA and none have any liability to Plaintiff for claims under the FLSA. 32. At all relevant times, Defendants acted in good faith and reasonably believed that their conduct was not in violation of the FLSA and, therefore, have no liability to Plaintiff under the FLSA and no liability for liquidated damages. 06418-001\Whiteman\Orig Answer 4 Case 6:16-cv-00312-RP-JCM Document 8 Filed 09/06/16 Page 5 of 6 33. Plaintiff, at all material times was a very highly compensated director for Defendant Wardlaw Consulting Services, Inc. Plaintiff, at all times knew and understood that he was not subject to the overtime requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act. He has knowingly and maliciously filed this frivolous case for the purposes of harassment of Defendants. Defendants are entitled to recover their costs of court and reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred in connection with this case. V. JURY DEMAND 34. Defendants demand a jury trial. VI. PRAYER WHEREFORE, Defendants pray that upon final hearing herein this Court enter judgment: a. That Plaintiff’s request to bring this case or prosecute this case as a collective action or class-action be denied; b. That the Court find and determine that this case is frivolous, brought for the purposes of harassment and brought in bad faith; c. That upon final hearing herein, this Court enter judgment that Plaintiff take nothing; d. That Defendants recover their costs, expenses and reasonable attorneys fees; and 06418-001\Whiteman\Orig Answer 5 Case 6:16-cv-00312-RP-JCM Document 8 Filed 09/06/16 Page 6 of 6 e. That Defendants have such other and further relief, general or special, at law or in equity to which they may show themselves justly entitled. Respectfully submitted, SHEEHY, LOVELACE & MAYFIELD, PC/s/Philip E. McCleery Philip E. McCleery pmccleery@slmpc.com State Bar No. 13395000 David M. Mathews dmathews@slmpc.com State Bar No. 24058211 510 N. Valley Mills Drive, Suite 500 Waco, TX 76710 254.772.8022 Telephone 254.772.9297 Facsimile ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on this 6th day of September, 2016, a true and correct copy of Defendants’ Original Answer was served via electronic mail on the following attorneys of record: ko@obrienlawpc.com Kerry V. O’Brien jdbraziel@l-b-law.com J. Derek Braziel forester@l-b-law.com Jay Forester/s/Philip E. McCleery Philip E. McCleery 06418-001\Whiteman\Orig Answer 6